Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Intravascular Imaging- vs Angiography-Guided Complex PCI: 5-Year Outcomes From a Randomized Trial

  • RENOVATE COMPLEX-PCI Investigators
  • Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan university
  • Kangbuk Samsung Hospital
  • Chungbuk National University
  • Wonkwang University
  • Keimyung University
  • Samsung Changwon Hospital
  • Chung-Ang University
  • Chungnam National University
  • Inje University
  • Hallym University
  • Seoul National University
  • Gyeongsang National University
  • Hanyang University
  • Myeongji Hospital
  • Kyung Hee University
  • Ewha Womans University
  • Pusan National University

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Data regarding long-term outcomes of intravascular imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for complex coronary artery lesions, compared with angiography-guided PCI, remain limited. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to present long-term clinical outcomes of intravascular imaging-guided PCI compared with angiography-guided PCI in patients with complex coronary artery lesions. METHODS: Eligible patients with complex coronary artery lesions were randomly assigned 2:1 to undergo intravascular imaging-guided PCI or angiography-guided PCI in this prospective multicenter open-label superiority trial performed in South Korea. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: A total of 1,639 patients underwent randomization with 1,092 assigned to imaging-guided PCI and 547 assigned to angiography-guided PCI. At a median follow-up of 5.3 years (Q1-Q3: 4.4-6.2 years), the primary endpoint occurred in 109 of 1,092 patients (10.5%) in the intravascular imaging-guided PCI group and 78 of 547 patients (14.9%) in the angiography-guided PCI group (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.51-0.91; P = 0.009). Cardiac death or target vessel-related myocardial infarction occurred in 78 patients (7.6%) in the intravascular imaging-guided PCI group and in 56 patients (10.7%) in the angiography-guided PCI group, clinically driven target vessel revascularization in 45 (4.4%) and 32 (6.2%), and definite stent thrombosis in 1 (0.1%) and 4 (0.7%), respectively. There were no apparent differences in procedure-related safety events between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with complex coronary artery lesions undergoing PCI, intravascular imaging guidance reduced the risk of a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target vessel revascularization at median follow-up of 5.3 years, compared to angiography guidance. (Intravascular Imaging- Versus Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Complex Coronary Artery Disease [RENOVATE-COMPLEX-PCI]; NCT03381872).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2099-2113
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume87
Issue number16
DOIs
StatePublished - 28 Apr 2026

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2026 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords

  • coronary artery disease
  • intravascular imaging
  • intravascular ultrasound
  • optical coherence tomography
  • percutaneous coronary intervention
  • randomized controlled trial

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Intravascular Imaging- vs Angiography-Guided Complex PCI: 5-Year Outcomes From a Randomized Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this