Abstract 4137467: Intravascular ultrasound-guided versus angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of randomized controlled trials

Background: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) allows better visualization of atherosclerotic plaques than angiography alone. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to comprehensively synthesize the available evidence regarding the efficacy of IVUS-guidance compared to angiography-guided PCI. Moreover, we conducted a sensitivity analysis to determine the applicability of IVUS guidance in complex PCI. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive literature search of major bibliographic databases from inception until May 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided PCI. Risk ratios (RR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled using the random-effects model, with a p-value <0.05 considered statistically significant. We conducted meta-regression to determine the moderating of baseline covariates on pooled outcomes. Results: Sixteen RCTs were included with 10,993 patients undergoing PCI (IVUS-guided PCI: 5684 patients; angiography-guided PCI: 5157 patients). IVUS-guided PCI demonstrated a significantly lower risk of cardiac death [RR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.35, 0.68], major adverse cardiovascular events [RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.51, 0.80], myocardial infarction [RR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.59, 0.89], stent thrombosis [RR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.27, 0.75], target lesion revascularization [RR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.49, 0.74], and target vessel revascularization [RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.45, 0.70] than angiography-guided PCI. IVUS-guided PCI demonstrated a nonsignificant trend toward a reduced risk of all-cause mortality [RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.61, 1.04]. Meta-regression showed a nonsignificant moderating effect of the duration of follow-up, age of patients, baseline dyslipidemia, and hypertension status on pooled outcomes. A sensitivity analysis was conducted for patients undergoing complex PCI. The sensitivity analysis showed the superiority of IVUS-guided PCI compared to angiography-guided PCI by resulting in a significant improvement in the clinical outcomes. Conclusion: This meta-analysis concluded that IVUS-guided PCI resulted in a reduction in cardiac death, major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, and target vessel revascularization, compared to angiography-guided PCI. Moreover, we observed the superiority of IVUS guidance in complex PCI as well.