Role of intravascular ultrasound imaging in minimally enhanced percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndrome
https://doi.org/10.15829/17288800-2025-4360
EDN: OXPDCP
Abstract
Aim. To evaluate the role of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in performing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with minimal contrast enhancement in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).
Material and methods. The single-center retrospective study included 269 patients with nonST-segment elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS) who underwent coronary artery stenting. Patients were divided into three following groups: group 1 — angiography-guided PCI (n=100), group 2 — PCI with IVUS use (n=100), and group 3 — PCI with the combined use of IVUS and minimal contrast agent administration (n=69). The primary analysis included the assessment of contrast agent volume during PCI, the changes of creatinine level, glomerular filtration rate, and the incidence of acute kidney injury in patients with NSTE-ACS.
Results. The smallest contrast agent amount (73,3±5,1 ml) was administered to patients in group 3, where PCI was accompanied by the combined use of IVUS and minimal contrast agent administration (analysis of variance [ANOVA]; p<0,001, with Tukey's post-hoc test). There were no significant differences between the groups in the changes of creatinine clearance and glomerular filtration rate.
Conclusion. Quantitative parameters of average contrast agent administration during PCI in the angiographic and IVUS control groups were identified. Some renal function parameters in these groups were assessed. The effectiveness of the combined use of IVUS and minimal contrast agent administration in patients with NSTE-ACS was shown.
About the Authors
O. E. ZauralovRussian Federation
PhD, MD interventional radiologist of radiology-endovascular department of Vsevolozhsk Clinical Interdistrict Hospital, senior research officer Department of clinical gerontology and geriatrics of St. Petersburg Institute of Bioregulation and Gerontology.
Vsevolozhsk, Saint Petersburg
V. A. Solovyev
Russian Federation
MD interventional radiologist of radiology-endovascular department of Vsevolozhsk Clinical Interdistrict Hospital, senior research officer Department of clinical gerontology and geriatrics of St. Petersburg Institute of Bioregulation and Gerontology.
Vsevolozhsk, Saint Petersburg
V. N. Ardeev
Russian Federation
Head of department endovascular surgeon Vsevolozhsk Clinical Interdistrict. HospitalVsevolozhsk
Yu. Yu. Garin
Russian Federation
PhD, MD interventional radiologist of radiology-endovascular department of Vsevolozhsk Clinical Interdistrict Hospital, senior research officer Department of clinical gerontology and geriatrics of St. Petersburg Institute of Bioregulation and Gerontology.
Vsevolozhsk, Saint Petersburg
I. M. Ibragimov
Russian Federation
MD interventional radiologist of radiology-endovascular department of Vsevolozhsk Clinical Interdistrict Hospital.
Vsevolozhsk
K. L. Kozlov
Russian Federation
Doctor Med. Sci., Professor, Professor of the Department of Surgery; Endovascular Surgeon Military medical academy of S.M. Kirov.St. Petersburg
S. S. Mikhailov
Russian Federation
Doctor Med. Sci., Head of Department, Endovascular Surgeon Military medical academy of S.M. Kirov.St. Petersburg
I. R. Kirpichnikov
Russian Federation
MD interventional radiologist of radiology-endovascular department of Vsevolozhsk Clinical Interdistrict Hospital.
Vsevolozhsk
M. A. Belkov
Russian Federation
MD interventional radiologist of radiology-endovascular department of Vsevolozhsk Clinical Interdistrict Hospital.
Vsevolozhsk
O. E. Latkin
Russian Federation
MD interventional radiologist of radiology-endovascular department of Vsevolozhsk Clinical Interdistrict Hospital.
Vsevolozhsk
D. V. Gazizov
Russian Federation
MD interventional radiologist of radiology-endovascular department of Vsevolozhsk Clinical Interdistrict Hospital.
Vsevolozhsk
A. R. Mingalieva
Russian Federation
resident radiology-endovascular department of Almazov National Medical Research Centre.
Saint-Petersburg
D. A. Vorobevskii
Russian Federation
research scientist Department of clinical gerontology and geriatrics of St. Petersburg Institute of Bioregulation and Gerontology; interventional radiologist of radiology-endovascular department of City Hospital № 40.St. Petersburg
References
1. Himadri Shankar. Estimating contrast-induced nephropathy risk making: with a simplified score: a cohort study. Stud J Health Res Afr. 2024;5(6):6. doi:10.51168/sjhrafrica.v5i6.1261.
2. Sinitsin VE, Filatova DA, Mershina EA. Contrast-induced acute renal injury: the modern state of issue. Medical Visualization. 2022; 26(1):27-39. (In Russ.) doi:10.24835/10.24835/1607-0763-1088.
3. Moiseev VC, Mukhin NA, Smirnov AV, et al. Cardiovascular risk and chronic kidney disease: cardio — nephroprotection strategies. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2014;(8):7-37. (In Russ.) doi:10.15829/1560-4071-2014-8-7-37.
4. Petrov VI, Kudasheva AA, Frolov DV. Contrast — induced nephropathy: prevalence, diagnosis, prevention and treatment Journal of Volgograde state medical university. 2022;(2):7-18. (In Russ.) doi:10.19163/1994-9480-2022-19-2-7-18.
5. Theofilis P, Kalaitzidis R. Navigating nephrotoxic waters: A com prehensive overview of contrastinduced acute kidney injury pre vention. World J Radiol. 2024;16(6):168-83. doi:10.4329/wjr.v16.i6.168.
6. Ursta A, Kharkov E, Petrova M, et al. Contrast — induced nephropathy in subjects with acute coronary syndrome. Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Diseases. 2016;(3):108-12. (In Russ.) doi:10.17802/2306-1278-2016-3-108-112.
7. Demchuk OV, Sukmanova IA, Ponomarenko IV, et al. Contrastinduced nephropathy in patients with acute coronary syndrome: clinical significance, diagnosis, prophylaxis. Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2020;19(2):2255. (In Russ.) doi:10.15829/1728-8800-2019-2255.
8. Mintz GS, Nissen SE, Anderson WD, et al. American college of cardiology clinical expert consensus document on standards for acquisition, measurement and reporting of intravascular ultra sound studies (IVUS). A report of the American college of cardiology task force on clinical expert consensus documents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37(5):1478-92. doi:10.1016/s0735-1097(01)01175-5.
9. Johnson TW, Räber L, di Mario C, et al. Clinical use of intracoronary imaging. Part 2: acute coronary syndromes, ambiguous coronary angiography findings, and guiding interventional decisionmaking: an expert consensus document of the European association of percutaneous cardiovascular interventions. Eur Heart J. 2019; 40(31):2566-84. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz332.
10. Zhang J, Gao X, Kan J, et al. Intravascular ultrasound versus angiographyguided drug-eluting stent implantation: the ULTIMATE trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(24):3126-37. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.09.013.
11. Hong SJ, Mintz GS, Ahn CM, et al. IVUS-XPL investigators. Effect of intravascular ultrasound-guided drug-eluting stent implantation: 5-year follow-up of the IVUS-XPL randomized trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13(1):62-71. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2019.09.033.
12. Dimitriadis K, Pyrpyris N, Papanikolaou A, et al. Intravascular imaging in ultra-low or zero-contrast percutaneous coronary interventions: the time is now? J Clinical Med. 2023;12(23):7499 doi:10.3390/jcm12237499.
13. Eric A, Sahil A, Maureen K, et al. Intravascular ultrasound guidance for lower extremity arterial and venous interventions. EuroIntervention. 2022;18(7):598-608. doi:10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00898.
14. Azzalini L, Hachinohe D, Regazzoli D, et al. Ultra-low contrast percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with severe chronic kidney disease. EuroIntervention, 2018;14(8):896-7. doi:10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00774.
15. Alekyan BG, Boytsov SA, Manoshkina EM, Ganyukov VI. Analysis of Russian national indicators of myocardial revascularization in patients with acute coronary syndrome in 2022. Russian Journal of Endovascular Surgery. 2023;10(3):260-9. (In Russ.) doi:10.24183/2409-4080-2023-10-3-260-269.
16. Manske CL, Sprafka JM, Strony JT, et al. Contrast nephropathy in azotemic diabetic patients undergoing coronary angiography. Am J Med. 1990;89(5):615-20. doi:10.1016/0002-9343(90)90180-l.
17. Ezhumalai B. The principles of ultra-low contrast percutaneous coronary intervention. Indian Heart J. 2022;74(3):258-9. doi:10.1016/j.ihj.2022.04.005.
18. Sacha J. Marking wire technique for zero-contrast percutaneous coronary interventions. Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej. 2018; 14(2):204-5. doi:10.5114/aic.2018.76416.
19. Almendarez M, Gurm HS, Mariani J Jr, et al. Procedural strategies to reduce the incidence of contrast-induced acute kidney injury during percutaneous coronary intervention JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(19):1877-88. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2019.04.055.
20. Räber L, Mintz GS, Koskinas KC, et al. Clinical use of intracoronary imaging. Part 1: guidance and optimization of coronary interventions. An expert consensus document of the European association of percutaneous cardiovascular interventions. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39(35):3281-300. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy285.
Supplementary files
What is already known about the subject?
- Contrast-induced acute kidney injury is a complication that can occur during diagnostic and therapeutic manipulations in patients with acute coronary syndrome.
- Nephrotoxicity of radiocontrast agents is dose-dependent.
What might this study add?
- Intravascular ultrasound in combination with minimal radiocontrast agent administration in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome makes it possible to reduce the volume of contrast administered and, as a result, the risk of renal dysfunction.
Review
For citations:
Zauralov O.E., Solovyev V.A., Ardeev V.N., Garin Yu.Yu., Ibragimov I.M., Kozlov K.L., Mikhailov S.S., Kirpichnikov I.R., Belkov M.A., Latkin O.E., Gazizov D.V., Mingalieva A.R., Vorobevskii D.A. Role of intravascular ultrasound imaging in minimally enhanced percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2025;24(7):4360. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15829/17288800-2025-4360. EDN: OXPDCP