RESUMO
Objective To investigate the prediction by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) with monocyte to high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) ratio (MHR) of 12-month prognosis in patients with intermediate non-left main coronary lesions after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods Patients with intermediate non-left main coronary lesions diagnosed by coronary angiography were tested of monocyte counts and HDL-C levels at admission with MHRs calculated. IVUS was used to examine plaque stability in target lesions. Patients were dviided into stable plaque group (n=44) and unstable plaque group (n=140) according to the IVUS results. PCI was then operated in patients with unstable plaque or with minimum lumen area<4 mm2. The major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were recorded during the follow-up period of 12 months after PCI. Results MHR was significantly higher in unstable plaque group than that in stable plaque group[(22.6±8.4) vs.(14.1±7.2),P<0.001]. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed that an MHR cut-off of 16.05 had 74.2％ sensitivity and 77.0％ specificity for prediction of 12-month MACE after PCI (AUC 0.78, 95％ CI 0.71–0.85, P<0.001). Besides, unstable plaque with MHR over 16.05 was an independent risk factor for 12-month MACE after PCI (adjusted HR 3.26, 95％ CI 2.48–4.14, P=0.020). Conclusions IVUS combined with MHR is a valuable index predicting the prognosiso f patients with intermediate non-left main coronary lesions who underwent PCI.
RESUMO
Objective To compare the clinical effects of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and blood flow reserve fraction (FFR) in guiding the treatment of critical disease of coronary artery.Methods Forty nine patients with coronary artery disease who underwent coronary angiography were divided into IVUS group (n=43) and FFR group (n=51).In IVUS group,such as MLA ＜4 mm2 or coronary artery stenosis was insufficient,but IVUS showed unstable plaque,and we went the PCI treatment;in the FFR group,FFR＜0.75 was regarded as coronary stenting sign.The patients were followed up for 6 months.The incidence of cardiovascular adverse events was compared between the two groups.Results (1)There was no significant difference in general information and coronary angiography between the two groups (P＞ 0.05).(2)The proportion of interventional therapy in IVUS group was higher than that in FFR group (P＜0.01).(3)The incidence of adverse events between the two groups was not statistically significant (P＞0.05).Conclusion IVUS and FFR examination can be used to guide the interventional treatment of critical disease of coronary artery.However,the accuracy of IVUS can not replace the status of blood flow reserve.