Percutaneous coronary angioscopy: applications in interventional cardiology

Coronary angioscopy. Clinical applications

Percutaneous coronary angioscopy is an invaluable alternative imaging modality that can not be used routinely in the interventional cardiac catheterization laboratory. The major value of angioscopy lies in its ability to determine safely, quickly, and accurately intraluminal morphologies before and after coronary interventions. The results from angioscopy can then be used to target more specific treatment strategies, given the vast array of interventional treatment strategies available. Percutaneous coronary angioscopy, however, requires meticulous attention for the proper preparation and use of the angioscope to minimize the potential risks associated with the imaging procedure.

Comparison of angioscopy, intravascular ultrasound imaging and quantitative coronary angiography in predicting clinical outcome after coronary intervention in high risk patients

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to identify qualitative or quantitative variables present on angioscopy, intravascular ultrasound imaging or quantitative coronary arteriography that were associated with adverse clinical outcome after coronary intervention in high risk patients.

BACKGROUND

Patients with acute coronary syndromes and complex lesion morphology on angiography are at increased risk for acute complications after coronary angioplasty. Newer devices that primarily remove atheroma have not improved outcome over that of balloon angioplasty. Intravascular imaging can accurately identify intraluminal and intramural histopathologic features not adequately visualized during coronary arteriography and may provide mechanistic insight into the pathogenesis of abrupt closure and restenosis.

METHODS

Sixty high risk patients with unstable coronary syndromes and complex lesions on angiography underwent angioscopy (n = 40) and intravascular ultrasound imaging (n = 46) during interventional procedures. In 26 patients, both angioscopy and intravascular ultrasound were performed in the same lesion. All patients underwent off-line quantitative coronary arteriography. Coronary interventions included balloon (n = 21) and excimer laser (n = 4) angioplasty, directional (n = 19) and rotational (n = 6) atherectomy and stent implantation (n = 11). Patients were followed up for 1 year for objective evidence for recurrent ischemia.

RESULTS

Patients whose clinical presentation included rest angina or acute myocardial infarction or who received thrombolytic therapy within 24 h of procedure were significantly more likely to experience recurrent ischemia after intervention. Plaque rupture or thrombus on preprocedure angioscopy or angioscopic thrombus after intervention were also significantly associated with adverse outcome. Qualitative or quantitative variables on angiography, intravascular ultrasound or off-line quantitative arteriography were not associated with recurrent ischemia on univariate analysis. Multivariate predictors of recurrent ischemia were plaque rupture on preprocedure angioscopy (p < 0.05, odds ratio [OR] 10.15) and angioscopic thrombus after intervention (p < 0.05, OR 7.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Angioscopic plaque rupture and thrombus were independently associated with adverse outcome in patients with complex lesions after interventional procedures. These features were not identified by either angiography or intravascular ultrasound.

Angioscopic versus angiographic detection of intimal dissection and intracoronary thrombus

OBJECTIVES

This study was undertaken to compare coronary angioscopy with angiography for the detection of intimal dissection and intracoronary thrombus.

BACKGROUND

It has been demonstrated previously that coronary angioscopy provides more intravascular detail than cineangiography. Both imaging methods have to be compared directly to assess the additional diagnostic value of angioscopy.

METHODS

The angiograms and videotapes of 52 patients who had undergone angioscopy were reviewed independently by two observers unaware of other findings. Classic angiographic definitions were used for dissection and thrombus. Angioscopic dissection was defined as visible cracks or fissures on the lumen surface or mobile protruding structures that are contiguous with the vessel wall. Angioscopic thrombus was defined as a red, white or mixed red and white intraluminal mass.

RESULTS

Angiography and angioscopy were in agreement in 40.4% of cases in the absence of thrombus and in 11.5% in the presence of thrombus. No fewer than 25 (48.1%) angioscopically observed thrombi remained undetected at angiography. With angioscopy as the standard, although the specificity of angiography for thrombus was 100%, sensitivity was very low at 19%. Angioscopic dissection was present in 40 patients (76.9%) versus angiographic dissection in 15 patients (28.8%). With regard to dissection, there was no correlation between the two imaging methods (r phi = 0.15, p = 0.29).

CONCLUSIONS

Coronary angiography underestimates the presence of intracoronary thrombus. Angioscopy and angiography are complementary techniques for detecting and grading intimal dissections.

Angioscopic guided interventions in a saphenous vein bypass graft

Intracoronary stents appear promising for treatment of focal vein graft lesions, but their use may be limited by the presence of intraluminal thrombus. This report describes the use of percutaneous coronary angioscopy to identify the presence or absence of intraluminal thrombus and to guide interventional therapy with transluminal extraction coronary atherectomy (TEC) and stenting in a patient with a complex vein graft stenosis.