IVUS GUIDED VERSUS MULTI-SLICE CT CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY PLANNED PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION COMPARED TO THE CONVENTIONAL CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY GUIDED INTERVENTION.

Background: Intra-vascular ultrasound (IVUS) and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) are tools to guidepercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Aim of the work: This study aimed at comparing procedural outcome and MACCEs of IVUS, CCTA and angiography, guided PCI. Patients and methods: Prospective, single centered study. 90patients undergoing elective PCI distributed to 3 groups. Group A: IVUS guided PCI, group B: CCTA planned PCI and group C: angiography guided PCI. Procedural details and MACCEs were compared. Results: Most of the patients in this study were males (84.4%). Group B used significant amount of contrast, 50 - 380 ml (161.67 ± 71.97, P = 0.042). Also group B had significant longer stents, 12 - 48mm (23.76 ± 7.47, P = 0.008). Group A had significant number ofpatients who needed post-stenting balloon dilatation, 28 patients (93.34%), P=0.009.Most of the patients had satisfactory results withTIMI 3 flow (94.37%). No MACCEs were detected during the hospital stay. At 30 days follow-up, no significant difference found between the 3 groups. Conclusion: IVUS assed accurately the need of post-stenting balloon dilatation. CCTA is associated with larger amount of contrast use, longer lesion detection and subsequent longer stents deployed incomparison to IVUS and angiography alone.