A new intravascular ultrasound‐guided stenting strategy compared with angiography on stent expansion and procedural outcomes in patients with positive lesion remodeling

OBJECTIVES: We investigated the role of a new intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided stenting strategy versus angiography on optimal stent expansion (OSE) and procedural outcomes in patients with positive lesion remodeling. BACKGROUND: There are no IVUS criteria on how to achieve OSE. METHODS: A total of 100 patients were assigned to a new IVUS-guided stenting strategy (IVUS group) versus angiography-guided stenting (Angio group). In the IVUS group, among patients with positive lesion remodeling, defined as a remodeling ratio (RR; lesion external elastic membrane (EEM) area/distal reference EEM area) >1.05, the stent was expanded with a balloon sized to the distal reference EEM diameter. In the Angio group, the stent was expanded by visual estimation. In both groups, IVUS was performed after postdilation. RESULTS: Minimum stent area (MSA) and stent volume index were significantly larger in the IVUS versus Angio group (7.1 +/- 1.9 vs. 5.9 +/- 1.5 mm(2) , and 8.7 +/- 2.1 vs. 7.5 +/- 1.8 mm(3) /mm, respectively; p /=5.4 mm(2) , MSA >/=90% of distal reference lumen area (DRLA), or MSA > DRLA, were significantly higher in the IVUS versus Angio group (80 vs. 56%, 78 vs. 54%, and 71 vs. 38%, respectively; p < .01). Stent underexpansion, malapposition, and residual reference segment stenosis were significantly higher in the Angio versus IVUS group (44 vs. 12%, 16 vs. 4%, and 12 vs. 0%, respectively; p < .05). In the IVUS group, owing to positive remodeling, there was no incidence of dissection or perforation. CONCLUSIONS: This new strategy of IVUS-guided stenting in patients with positive lesion remodeling, compared with angiography, significantly increased stent expansion and decreased stent underexpansion, malapposition, and residual reference segment stenosis with no complications.