Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 346

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Optical Coherence Tomography to Optimize Results of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Non–ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: Results of the Multicenter, Randomized DOCTORS Study (Does Optical Coherence Tomography Optimize Results of Stenting)

Meneveau, Nicolas, Souteyrand, Geraud, Motreff, Pascal, Caussin, Christophe, Amabile, Nicolas, Ohlmann, Patrick, Morel, Olivier, Lefrançois, Yoann, Descotes-Genon, Vincent, Silvain, Johanne, Braik, Nassim, Chopard, Romain, Chatot, Marion, Ecarnot, Fiona, Tauzin, Hélène, Van Belle, Eric, Belle, Loïc, Schiele, François·2016·Circulation

Abstract

Background: No randomized study has investigated the value of optical coherence tomography (OCT) in optimizing the results of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized study involving 240 patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes to compare OCT-guided PCI (use of OCT pre- and post-PCI; OCT-guided group) to fluoroscopy-guided PCI (angiography-guided group). The primary end point was the functional result of PCI assessed by the measure of post PCI fractional flow reserve. Secondary end points included procedural complications and type 4a periprocedural myocardial infarction. Safety was assessed by the rate of acute kidney injury. Results: OCT use led to a change in procedural strategy in 50% of the patients in the OCT-guided group. The primary end point was improved in the OCT-guided group, with a significantly higher fractional flow reserve value (0.94±0.04 versus 0.92±0.05, P =0.005) compared with the angiography-guided group. There was no significant difference in the rate of type 4a myocardial infarction (33% in the OCT-group versus 40% in the angiography-guided group, P =0.28). The rates of procedural complications (5.8%) and acute kidney injury (1.6%) were identical in each group despite longer procedure time and use of more contrast medium in the OCT-guided group. Post-PCI OCT revealed stent underexpansion in 42% of patients, stent malapposition in 32%, incomplete lesion coverage in 20%, and edge dissection in 37.5%. This led to the more frequent use of poststent overdilation in the OCT-guided group versus the angiography-guided group (43% versus 12.5%, P <0.0001) with lower residual stenosis (7.0±4.3% versus 8.7±6.3%, P =0.01). Conclusions: In patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes, OCT-guided PCI is associated with higher postprocedure fractional flow reserve than PCI guided by angiography alone. OCT did not increase periprocedural complications, type 4a myocardial infarction, or acute kidney injury. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01743274.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.116.024393

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 20 references

Cited by

See all 346

Metadata

Authors
Meneveau, N., Souteyrand, G., Motreff, P., Caussin, C., Amabile, N., Ohlmann, P., Morel, O., Lefrançois, Y., Descotes-Genon, V., Silvain, J., Braik, N., Chopard, R., Chatot, M., Ecarnot, F., Tauzin, H., Van Belle, E., Belle, L., & Schiele, F.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2016-09-27
Volume
134
Issue
13
Pages
906-917
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2514535253
Cited by
346
References
20
FWCI
30.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Optical Coherence Tomography to Optimize Results of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Non–ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: Results of the Multicenter, Randomized DOCTORS Study (Does Optical Coherence Tomography Optimize Results of Stenting). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.116.024393
The paper
Meneveau, N., Souteyrand, G., Motreff, P., Caussin, C., Amabile, N., Ohlmann, P., Morel, O., Lefrançois, Y., Descotes-Genon, V., Silvain, J., Braik, N., Chopard, R., Chatot, M., Ecarnot, F., Tauzin, H., Van Belle, E., Belle, L., & Schiele, F. (2016). Optical Coherence Tomography to Optimize Results of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Non–ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: Results of the Multicenter, Randomized DOCTORS Study (Does Optical Coherence Tomography Optimize Results of Stenting). Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.116.024393

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.