Background: Intravascular imaging is a tool to detect coronary artery atherosclerosis which plays the major role in vessel stenosis degree determination and plaque pathology as a supplement of invasive angiography. This study aimed at comparing Intravascular imaging with invasive angiography.
Materials and Methods: For retrieving second type studies, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Centre for Review and Dissemination (CRD) were searched up to September 2013. Searching was carried out by two persons using angiography and intravascular imaging keywords. Studies which compared intravascular ultrasound technology with invasive angiography were analyzed.
Results: Based on studies which reported the rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR) after one year of follow-up, there was a statistically significant difference between intravascular ultrasound and invasive angiography alone. It seems that TLR rate was lower with intravascular ultrasound (P = 0.02).In terms of cost effectiveness, approximately 54, 000 USD spend per each QALY using IVUS method.
Conclusion: Although, intravascular ultrasound could be able to detect coronary arteries damages and help out physician in selecting the most appropriate treatment, but due to the high cost of an intravascular ultrasound catheter, the invasive angiography is choice of physicians and patients in coronary intervention.
