Prognostic Impact of Operator Experience and IVUS Guidance on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes After Complex PCI

Contemporary status of diagnostic endoluminal ultrasound and optical coherence tomography in the ureter

Objective

To evaluate via a review of published literature, the efficacy of endoluminal ultrasound (ELUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the following ureteric diseases: urolithiasis, upper tract urothelial carcinoma, stricture disease and pelvic-ureteric junction obstruction (PUJO).

Patients and methods

Ureteric high-frequency ELUS provides 360° imaging, to a depth of 20 mm, and has been demonstrated to assess ureteric stricture length, degree of fibrosis and aetiology. OCT produces high-quality images with a penetration depth of 2 mm. ELUS has proven to be useful at the time of endopyelotomy for PUJO as it can identify crossing vessels, some not detectable on CT angiography, allowing the urologist to avoid these when making their incision. Ureteric ELUS may be utilised for submucosal ureteric stones as they are highly visible. Endoluminal ultrasound may be deployed in the case of known sub-mucosal urolithiasis when the ureter appears stone-free. It may help identify sub-mucosal stones or stones within diverticulum.

Results

Endoluminal ultrasound has been analysed for its use in determining muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the ureter. The PPV for ≥pT2 was only 16.7% in one study of six patients with MIBC and 76.2% in 21 patients with

Conclusions

Ureteric ELUS has been reported to be a useful tool in endopyelotomy, urolithiasis and stricture disease. The staging of ureteric urothelial carcinoma remains unsatisfactory with current imaging techniques and biopsy methods, and, based on the current literature, ELUS does not appear to have a strong enough PPV to determine muscle invasion. Ureteric OCT may be a useful tool in the future staging of upper tract urothelial carcinoma, particularly in differentiating the stage of small tumours. Further studies are needed in this area.

Collapse

Key Words

• endoluminal ultrasound
• optical coherence tomography
• ureter

Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Samuel Sii Department of SurgeryUniversity of Melbourne, Austin HealthMelbourneVictoriaAustralia
Jeremy Bolton Monash UniversityMelbourneVictoriaAustralia
Jake Tempo Department of SurgeryUniversity of Melbourne, Austin HealthMelbourneVictoriaAustralia
Damien Bolton Department of SurgeryUniversity of Melbourne, Austin HealthMelbourneVictoriaAustralia

Collapse

Case Volumes and Outcomes Among Early-Career Interventional Cardiologists in the United States

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the procedural characteristics, case volumes, and mortality rates for early- vs non-early-career interventional cardiologists in the United States.

OBJECTIVES

This study examined operator-level data for patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between April 2018 and June 2022.

METHODS

Data were collected from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry, American Board of Internal Medicine certification database, and National Plan and Provider Enumeration System database. Early-career operators were within 5 years of the end of training. Annual case volume, expected mortality and bleeding risk, and observed/predicted mortality and bleeding outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 1,451 operators were early career; 1,011 changed their career status during the study; and 6,251 were non-early career. Overall, 514,540 patients were treated by early-career and 2,296,576 patients by non-early-career operators. The median annual case volume per operator was 59 (Q1-Q3: 31-97) for early-career and 57 (Q1-Q3: 28-100) for non-early-career operators. Early-career operators were more likely to treat patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and urgent indications for PCI (both P < 0.001). The median predicted mortality risk was 2.0% (Q1-Q3: 1.5%-2.7%) for early-career and 1.8% (Q1-Q3: 1.2%-2.4%) for non-early-career operators. The median predicted bleeding risk was 4.9% (Q1-Q3: 4.2%-5.7%) for early-career and 4.4% (Q1-Q3: 3.7%-5.3%) for non-early-career operators. After adjustment, an increased risk of mortality (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.05-1.17; P < 0.0001) and bleeding (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.05-1.12; P < 0.0001) were associated with early-career status.

CONCLUSIONS

Early-career operators are caring for patients with more acute presentations and higher predicted risk of mortality and bleeding compared with more experienced colleagues, with modestly worse outcomes. These data should inform institutional practices to support the development of early-career proceduralists.

Comparative Effectiveness of Intravascular Ultrasound Versus Angiography in Abdominal and Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The effectiveness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) with angiography compared with angiography guidance alone in treating aortic conditions, such as dissections, aneurysms, and blunt traumatic injuries, remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the current literature for IVUS use during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and abdominal endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases was conducted in March 2024 adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies comparing outcomes of TEVAR/EVAR with and without IVUS were identified. The outcomes of interest included contrast volume, fluoroscopy and procedural time, perioperative endoleak, and reinterventions and all-cause mortality during follow-up. Data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted. Pooled analysis was performed using a random-effect model. Subgroup analysis was performed stratified by the condition being treated. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. A total of 4,219 patients (n = 2,655 IVUS and n = 1,564 non-IVUS) from 9 observational studies were included. The IVUS group exhibited a reduction in contrast agent volume (weighted mean difference -34.65 mL, 95% CI -54.73 to -14.57) and fluoroscopy time (weighted mean difference -6.13 minutes, 95% CI -11.10 to -1.15), with no difference in procedural time. The perioperative type I and III endoleak occurrences were similar (risk ratio 2.36, 95% CI 0.55 to 10.11; risk ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.09 to 5.77, respectively). Reintervention and mortality during follow-up were comparable (hazard ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.97; hazard ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.18, respectively). All the included studies had small risks of bias. In conclusion, this meta-analysis provides evidence that IVUS enables the safe deployment of TEVAR/EVAR with reduced contrast agent and radiation exposure.

Coronary Angiography, Intravascular Ultrasound, and Optical Coherence Tomography for Guiding of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Results from multiple randomized clinical trials comparing outcomes after intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)- and optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with invasive coronary angiography (ICA)-guided PCI as well as a pivotal trial comparing the 2 intravascular imaging (IVI) techniques have provided mixed results.

METHODS

Major electronic databases were searched to identify eligible trials evaluating at least 2 PCI guidance strategies among ICA, IVUS, and OCT. The 2 coprimary outcomes were target lesion revascularization and myocardial infarction. The secondary outcomes included ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel myocardial infarction, death, cardiac death, target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, and major adverse cardiac events. Frequentist random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted. The results were replicated by Bayesian random-effects models. Pairwise meta-analyses of the direct components, multiple sensitivity analyses, and pairwise meta-analyses IVI versus ICA were supplemented.

RESULTS

The results from 24 randomized trials (15 489 patients: IVUS versus ICA, 46.4%, 7189 patients; OCT versus ICA, 32.1%, 4976 patients; OCT versus IVUS, 21.4%, 3324 patients) were included in the network meta-analyses. IVUS was associated with reduced target lesion revascularization compared with ICA (odds ratio [OR], 0.69 [95% CI, 0.54-0.87]), whereas no significant differences were observed between OCT and ICA (OR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.63-1.09]) and OCT and IVUS (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.88-1.66]). Myocardial infarction did not significantly differ between guidance strategies (IVUS versus ICA: OR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.70-1.19]; OCT versus ICA: OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.68-1.11]; OCT versus IVUS: OR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.69-1.33]). These results were consistent with the secondary outcomes of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization, and sensitivity analyses generally did not reveal inconsistency. OCT was associated with a significant reduction of stent thrombosis compared with ICA (OR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.26-0.92]) but only in the frequentist analysis. Similarly, the results in terms of survival between IVUS or OCT and ICA were uncertain across analyses. A total of 25 randomized trials (17 128 patients) were included in the pairwise meta-analyses IVI versus ICA where IVI guidance was associated with reduced target lesion revascularization, cardiac death, and stent thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

IVI-guided PCI was associated with a reduction in ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization compared with ICA-guided PCI, with the difference most evident for IVUS. In contrast, no significant differences in myocardial infarction were observed between guidance strategies.

CVIT 2023 clinical expert consensus document on intravascular ultrasound

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) provides precise anatomic information in coronary arteries including quantitative measurements and morphological assessment. To standardize the IVUS analysis in the current era, this updated expert consensus document summarizes the methods of measurements and assessment of IVUS images and the clinical evidence of IVUS use in percutaneous coronary intervention.