These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: OCT compared with IVUS in a coronary lesion assessment: the OPUS-CLASS study.
    Author: Kubo T, Akasaka T, Shite J, Suzuki T, Uemura S, Yu B, Kozuma K, Kitabata H, Shinke T, Habara M, Saito Y, Hou J, Suzuki N, Zhang S.
    Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging; 2013 Oct; 6(10):1095-1104. PubMed ID: 24011777.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability of frequency domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) for coronary measurements compared with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). BACKGROUND: Accurate luminal measurement is expected in FD-OCT because this technology offers high resolution and excellent contrast between lumen and vessel wall. METHODS: In 5 medical centers, 100 patients with coronary artery disease were prospectively studied by using angiography, FD-OCT, and IVUS. In addition, 5 phantom models of known lumen dimensions (lumen diameter 3.08 mm; lumen area 7.45 mm(2)) were examined using FD-OCT and IVUS. Quantitative image analyses of the coronary arteries and phantom models were performed by an independent core laboratory. RESULTS: In the clinical study, the mean minimum lumen diameter measured by QCA was significantly smaller than that measured by FD-OCT (1.81 ± 0.72 mm vs. 1.91 ± 0.69 mm; p < 0.001) and the minimum lumen diameter measured by IVUS was significantly greater than that measured by FD-OCT (2.09 ± 0.60 mm vs. 1.91 ± 0.69 mm; p < 0.001). The minimum lumen area measured by IVUS was significantly greater than that by FD-OCT (3.68 ± 2.06 mm(2) vs. 3.27 ± 2.22 mm(2); p < 0.001), although a significant correlation was observed between the 2 imaging techniques (r = 0.95, p < 0.001; mean difference 0.41 mm(2)). Both FD-OCT and IVUS exhibited good interobserver reproducibility, but the root-mean-squared deviation between measurements was approximately twice as high for the IVUS measurements compared with the FD-OCT measurements (0.32 mm(2) vs. 0.16 mm(2)). In a phantom model, the mean lumen area according to FD-OCT was equal to the actual lumen area of the phantom model, with low SD; IVUS overestimated the lumen area and was less reproducible than FD-OCT (8.03 ± 0.58 mm(2) vs. 7.45 ± 0.17 mm(2); p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this prospective multicenter study demonstrate that FD-OCT provides accurate and reproducible quantitative measurements of coronary dimensions in the clinical setting.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]