Final results of the Can Routine Ultrasound Influence Stent Expansion (CRUISE) study

Peter J. Fitzgerald, Akio Oshima, Motoya Hayase, Jonas A. Metz, Steven R. Bailey, Donald S. Baim, Michael W. Cleman, Ezra Deutsch, Daniel J. Diver, Martin B. Leon, Jeffrey W. Moses, Stephen N. Oesterle, Paul A. Overlie, Carl J. Pepine, Robert D. Safian, Jacob Shani, Charles A. Simonton, Richard W. Smalling, Paul S. Teirstein, James P. ZidarAlan C. Yeung, Richard E. Kuntz, Paul G. Yock

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

354 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background - Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) can assess stent geometry more accurately than angiography. Several studies have demonstrated that the degree of stent expansion as measured by IVUS directly correlated to clinical outcome. However, it is unclear if routine ultrasound guidance of stent implantation improves clinical outcome as compared with angiographic guidance alone. Methods and Results - The CRUISE (Can Routine Ultrasound Influence Stent Expansion) study, a multicenter study IVUS substudy of the Stent Anti-thrombotic Regimen Study, was designed to assess the impact of IVUS on stent deployment in the high-pressure era. Nine centers were prospectively assigned to stent deployment with the use of ultrasound guidance and 7 centers to angiographic guidance alone with documentary (blinded) IVUS at the conclusion of the procedure. A total of 525 patients were enrolled with completed quantitative coronary angiography, quantitative coronary ultrasound, and clinical events adjudicated at 9 months for 499 patients. The IVUS-guided group had a larger minimal lumen diameter (2.9 ± 0.4 versus 2.7 ± 0.5 mm, P < 0.001) by quantitative coronary angiography and a larger minimal stent area (7.78 ± 1.72 versus 7.06 ± 2.13 mm2, P < 0.001) by quantitative coronary ultrasound. Target vessel revascularization, defined as clinically driven repeat interventional or surgical therapy of the index vessel at 9 month-follow-up, occurred significantly less frequently in the IVUS-guided group (8.5% versus 15.3%, P < 0.05; relative reduction of 44%). Conclusions - These data suggest that ultrasound guidance of stent implantation may result in more effective stent expansion compared with angiographic guidance alone.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)523-530
Number of pages8
JournalCirculation
Volume102
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2000

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Angiography
  • Coronary disease
  • Restenosis
  • Stents
  • Ultrasonics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

Fitzgerald, P. J., Oshima, A., Hayase, M., Metz, J. A., Bailey, S. R., Baim, D. S., Cleman, M. W., Deutsch, E., Diver, D. J., Leon, M. B., Moses, J. W., Oesterle, S. N., Overlie, P. A., Pepine, C. J., Safian, R. D., Shani, J., Simonton, C. A., Smalling, R. W., Teirstein, P. S., ... Yock, P. G. (2000). Final results of the Can Routine Ultrasound Influence Stent Expansion (CRUISE) study. Circulation, 102(5), 523-530. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.102.5.523