2024
Intravascular Imaging–Guided Versus Angiography‐Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials
Sreenivasan J, Reddy R, Jamil Y, Malik A, Chamie D, Howard J, Nanna M, Mintz G, Maehara A, Ali Z, Moses J, Chen S, Chieffo A, Colombo A, Leon M, Lansky A, Ahmad Y. Intravascular Imaging–Guided Versus Angiography‐Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials. Journal Of The American Heart Association 2024, 13: e031111. PMID: 38214263, PMCID: PMC10926835, DOI: 10.1161/jaha.123.031111.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsAdverse cardiac eventsPercutaneous coronary interventionAngiography-guided percutaneous coronary interventionTarget vessel revascularizationTarget-lesion revascularizationCardiac eventsCardiac deathImaging-guided percutaneous coronary interventionWeighted mean follow-up durationMeta-analysisPrimary outcomeMean follow-up durationStent thrombosisMeta-analysis of randomized trialsStudy-level meta-analysisComplex lesion subsetsIntravascular imagingAll-cause deathRandom-effects meta-analysisStandard of careIntention-to-treat principleUpdates of clinical guidelinesMixed-effects meta-regressionComplex percutaneous coronary interventionIntravascular imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention
2023
Comparison of intravascular ultrasound, optical coherence tomography, and conventional angiography‐guided percutaneous coronary interventions: A systematic review, network meta‐analysis, and meta‐regression
Park D, An S, Jolly N, Attanasio S, Yadav N, Gutierrez J, Nanna M, Rao S, Vij A. Comparison of intravascular ultrasound, optical coherence tomography, and conventional angiography‐guided percutaneous coronary interventions: A systematic review, network meta‐analysis, and meta‐regression. Catheterization And Cardiovascular Interventions 2023, 102: 440-450. PMID: 37483068, PMCID: PMC10908343, DOI: 10.1002/ccd.30784.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsMajor adverse cardiovascular eventsPercutaneous coronary interventionOptical coherence tomographyCoronary angiographyIntravascular ultrasoundCoronary interventionCardiac deathClinical outcomesClinical efficacyConventional angiography-guided PCIAngiography-guided percutaneous coronary interventionCoherence tomographyUse of IVUSSuperiority of OCTAdverse cardiovascular eventsRandomized clinical trialsConventional coronary angiographyImaging modalitiesComparative clinical efficacyBest imaging modalityIntracoronary imaging modalityLesion revascularizationPCI guidanceCardiovascular eventsCause mortality
2022
Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitors, Angiotensin Receptor Blockers, and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction
Park D, An S, Attanasio S, Jolly N, Malhotra S, Doukky R, Samsky M, Sen S, Ahmad T, Nanna M, Vij A. Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitors, Angiotensin Receptor Blockers, and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction. The American Journal Of Cardiology 2022, 187: 84-92. PMID: 36459752, PMCID: PMC10958453, DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.10.026.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAntihypertensive AgentsBayes TheoremDeathHeart FailureHumansHypotensionNeprilysinNetwork Meta-AnalysisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReceptors, AngiotensinStroke VolumeTreatment OutcomeVentricular Dysfunction, LeftConceptsAngiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitorAngiotensin receptor blockersReduced ejection fractionHeart failureEjection fractionHigh riskCause mortalityReceptor blockersCardiac deathLower riskEnzyme inhibitorsMajor adverse cardiac eventsAngiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitorsAdverse cardiac eventsEfficacy end pointNetwork meta-analysis approachImproved clinical outcomesRandomized clinical trialsP scoreCardiac eventsAngiotensin receptorsClinical outcomesNeprilysin inhibitorClinical benefitRecent trials