Elsevier

The Lancet

Volume 388, Issue 10060, 26 November–2 December 2016, Pages 2618-2628
The Lancet

Articles
Optical coherence tomography compared with intravascular ultrasound and with angiography to guide coronary stent implantation (ILUMIEN III: OPTIMIZE PCI): a randomised controlled trial

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31922-5Get rights and content

Summary

Background

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is most commonly guided by angiography alone. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance has been shown to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) after PCI, principally by resulting in a larger postprocedure lumen than with angiographic guidance. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) provides higher resolution imaging than does IVUS, although findings from some studies suggest that it might lead to smaller luminal diameters after stent implantation. We sought to establish whether or not a novel OCT-based stent sizing strategy would result in a minimum stent area similar to or better than that achieved with IVUS guidance and better than that achieved with angiography guidance alone.

Methods

In this randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older undergoing PCI from 29 hospitals in eight countries. Eligible patients had one or more target lesions located in a native coronary artery with a visually estimated reference vessel diameter of 2·25–3·50 mm and a length of less than 40 mm. We excluded patients with left main or ostial right coronary artery stenoses, bypass graft stenoses, chronic total occlusions, planned two-stent bifurcations, and in-stent restenosis. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1; with use of an interactive web-based system in block sizes of three, stratified by site) to OCT guidance, IVUS guidance, or angiography-guided stent implantation. We did OCT-guided PCI using a specific protocol to establish stent length, diameter, and expansion according to reference segment external elastic lamina measurements. All patients underwent final OCT imaging (operators in the IVUS and angiography groups were masked to the OCT images). The primary efficacy endpoint was post-PCI minimum stent area, measured by OCT at a masked independent core laboratory at completion of enrolment, in all randomly allocated participants who had primary outcome data. The primary safety endpoint was procedural MACE. We tested non-inferiority of OCT guidance to IVUS guidance (with a non-inferiority margin of 1·0 mm2), superiority of OCT guidance to angiography guidance, and superiority of OCT guidance to IVUS guidance, in a hierarchical manner. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02471586.

Findings

Between May 13, 2015, and April 5, 2016, we randomly allocated 450 patients (158 [35%] to OCT, 146 [32%] to IVUS, and 146 [32%] to angiography), with 415 final OCT acquisitions analysed for the primary endpoint (140 [34%] in the OCT group, 135 [33%] in the IVUS group, and 140 [34%] in the angiography group). The final median minimum stent area was 5·79 mm2 (IQR 4·54–7·34) with OCT guidance, 5·89 mm2 (4·67–7·80) with IVUS guidance, and 5·49 mm2 (4·39–6·59) with angiography guidance. OCT guidance was non-inferior to IVUS guidance (one-sided 97·5% lower CI −0·70 mm2; p=0·001), but not superior (p=0·42). OCT guidance was also not superior to angiography guidance (p=0·12). We noted procedural MACE in four (3%) of 158 patients in the OCT group, one (1%) of 146 in the IVUS group, and one (1%) of 146 in the angiography group (OCT vs IVUS p=0·37; OCT vs angiography p=0·37).

Interpretation

OCT-guided PCI using a specific reference segment external elastic lamina-based stent optimisation strategy was safe and resulted in similar minimum stent area to that of IVUS-guided PCI. These data warrant a large-scale randomised trial to establish whether or not OCT guidance results in superior clinical outcomes to angiography guidance.

Funding

St Jude Medical.

Introduction

Angiography is the most commonly used imaging method to guide procedural decision making during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, angiography has various well recognised limitations.1 Angiography provides a two-dimensional representation of a complex three-dimensional structure and only displays luminal dimensions and characteristics, without information about plaque morphology, vascular remodelling, or atherosclerosis burden. Angiography is also suboptimal in identifying stent underexpansion, malapposition, residual dissection, thrombus, and plaque protrusion. These limitations are overcome, in part, by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), which allows tomographic cross-sectional imaging of the vessel wall. Findings from large observational cohort studies, randomised trials, and meta-analyses have shown that by achieving larger luminal dimensions than does angiography guidance, IVUS-guided drug-eluting stent implantation might reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including target lesion revascularisation (TLR) and stent thrombosis.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Despite these data and guideline recommendations,9 IVUS-guided PCI is infrequently used in most countries. Low axial resolution (150–200 μm), poor discrimination of plaque subtypes, slow pullback, and absence of appropriately powered randomised trials are often cited as the causes for low levels of adoption.

Research in context

Evidence before this study

We searched PubMed using the search terms “optical coherence tomography”, “intravascular ultrasound”, “angiography”, and “percutaneous coronary intervention” using MeSH terms and appropriate variations up to Dec 5, 2014, with no language restrictions, before designing our study. We found no previous randomised controlled trials that compared all three methods in terms of either acute procedural success or clinical outcomes. Several studies, mostly observational, but some randomised controlled trials compared intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) with angiography. Meta-analyses of these studies identified reductions in target lesion failure, stent thrombosis, major adverse cardiovascular events, and death with use of IVUS, largely as a result of larger minimum stent area. Investigators of observational studies comparing optical coherence tomography (OCT) with angiography suggested that although OCT guidance frequently led physicians to change their percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy, it often led to implantation of smaller diameter stents than with angiography. Only one head-to-head study of 70 patients compared OCT with IVUS directly, in which IVUS led to larger postprocedural minimum stent area than did OCT.

Added value of this study

This is the first randomised controlled trial to compare OCT-guided, IVUS-guided, and angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention. The study was done in eight countries in 29 hospitals with liberal inclusion criteria representing the global practice of interventional cardiology. Despite its better resolution than that of IVUS, OCT technology has various limitations, including incomplete visualisation of the vessel wall in some lipid-rich lesions, resulting in use of smaller stents based on luminal dimensions than with IVUS and angiography. To overcome these limitations, we introduced a standardised method for stent sizing based on preintervention OCT measurements of the external elastic lamina. OCT guidance using this stent optimisation protocol was non-inferior to IVUS guidance for the primary endpoint of postprocedure minimum stent area. OCT guidance led to greater stent expansion and acute procedural success than did angiography guidance, with fewer untreated major dissections and malappositions than with IVUS guidance.

Implications of all the available evidence

Since the inception of our study, the 800 patient multicentre randomised controlled OPINION trial showed that target vessel failure of OCT guidance was non-inferior to that of IVUS guidance at 12 months. These results are consistent with what we would have predicted from the similar minimum stent area achieved with the two imaging methods in our study. Another 240 patient multicentre randomised controlled trial, DOCTORS, showed that OCT guidance slightly improved postprocedural fractional flow reserve in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction compared with angiography guidance, without affecting clinical outcomes. Our study is the first to compare all three methods and substantiates the prevailing view that imaging guidance confers advantages compared with angiography guidance alone and, furthermore, that OCT guidance is non-inferior to IVUS guidance for achieving acute procedural success. OCT guidance led to fewer untreated major dissections and malappositions than did IVUS guidance. Larger randomised controlled trials than this one are required to show whether or not OCT guidance results in superior clinical outcomes than does IVUS guidance or angiography guidance.

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a newer intravascular imaging method than IVUS that provides rapid acquisition of higher resolution (10–20 μm) images capable of more accurately identifying thrombus, lipid, calcium, fibrous cap thickness, dissections, plaque prolapse, stent malapposition, and strut coverage.10 Nonetheless, few studies of OCT-guided stenting have been done, and OCT is not widely used for this purpose. In the ILUMIEN I study,11 OCT guidance changed PCI procedural planning in 57% of cases. Surprisingly, in 31% of cases, OCT led to choice of a smaller diameter stent size than would have occurred with angiography alone. Investigators of a small randomised comparison12 of OCT-guided versus IVUS-guided PCI also reported smaller acute luminal gains using OCT than using IVUS, a finding potentially due to the low-depth penetration of OCT compared with IVUS at lipid-rich lesion sites.10 Thus, whether or not OCT guidance of stent implantation can achieve similar luminal dimensions or clinical outcomes as can IVUS guidance is unknown.

By contrast with the lesion site, the true vessel size is assessable with OCT in disease-free reference segments.10 We therefore developed an OCT-specific technique for stent implantation and sizing on the basis of reference vessel diameter measurements and did a three-arm randomised trial to establish whether or not this novel OCT-guided approach is non-inferior or superior to IVUS guidance and superior to angiography guidance during PCI.

Section snippets

Study design and participants

The ILUMIEN III: OPTIMIZE PCI study was a randomised controlled trial done at 29 hospitals in eight countries. We considered for enrolment patients aged 18 years or older undergoing PCI with a metallic drug-eluting stent for angina (stable or unstable), silent ischaemia, non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI), or recent ST-segment elevation MI (>24 h from initial presentation). Eligible patients had one or more target lesions located in a native coronary artery with a visually

Results

Between May 13, 2015, and April 5, 2016, we randomly assigned 450 patients at 29 hospitals in eight countries to receive either OCT-guided PCI (158 [35%]), IVUS-guided PCI (146 [32%]), or angiography-guided PCI (146 [32%]). Patient assignment and follow-up are shown in the figure. Final OCT imaging was analysable in 140 (89%) patients in the OCT-guided group, 135 (92%) in the IVUS-guided group, and 140 (96%) in the angiography-guided group. We used imaging to guide stent implantation in 154

Discussion

This study, in which we used a novel OCT-based protocol to determine stent length and diameter according to external elastic lamina measurements in the proximal and distal reference segments to optimise lumen dimensions and lesion coverage, is the first randomised controlled trial comparing OCT-guided, IVUS-guided, and angiography-guided PCI. Post-PCI minimum stent area achieved after OCT-guided PCI was non-inferior to that achieved with IVUS-guided PCI, meeting the primary endpoint of the

References (28)

  • G Guagliumi et al.

    Examination of the in vivo mechanisms of late drug-eluting stent thrombosis: findings from optical coherence tomography and intravascular ultrasound imaging

    JACC Cardiovasc Interv

    (2012)
  • M Nakano et al.

    Causes of early stent thrombosis in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome: an ex vivo human autopsy study

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (2014)
  • GS Mintz et al.

    Limitations of angiography in the assessment of plaque distribution in coronary artery disease: a systematic study of target lesion eccentricity in 1446 lesions

    Circulation

    (1996)
  • B Witzenbichler et al.

    Relationship between intravascular ultrasound guidance and clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stents: the assessment of dual antiplatelet therapy with drug-eluting stents (ADAPT-DES) study

    Circulation

    (2014)
  • Cited by (0)

    Investigators listed in the appendix

    View full text