Safety of optical coherence tomography in daily practice: a comparison with intravascular ultrasound

Aims Previous studies have reported the safety and feasibility of both time-domain optical coherence tomography (TDOCT) and Fourier-domain OCT (FD-OCT) in highly selected patients and clinical settings. However, the generalizability of these data is limited, and data in unselected patient populations reflecting a routine cathlab practice are lacking. We compared safety of intracoronary FD-OCT imaging to intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) imaging in a large real-world series of consecutive patients who underwent invasive imaging during coronary catheterization in our centre. Methods and results This is a prospective, single-centre registry of patients scheduled for coronary angiography or intervention undergoing intracoronary imaging with FD-OCT or IVUS between April 2008 and December 2013. Intra-procedural and major inhospital adverse events that could be possibly related to invasive imaging were registered routinely by the operator as part of our clinical report and prospectively recorded in our database. These events were retrospectively individually adjudicated by an independent safety committee. Between April 2008 and December 2013, 13 418 diagnostic or interventional coronary catheterization procedures were performed. Of these, 1142 procedures used OCT and 2476 procedures used IVUS. Invasive imaging-related complications were rare, did not differ between the two imaging methods (OCT: n = 7, 0.6%; IVUS: n = 12, 0.5%; P = 0.6), and were self-limiting after retrieval of the imaging catheter or easily treatable in the catheterization laboratory. No major adverse events, prolongation of hospital stay, or permanent patient harm was observed. Conclusion FD-OCT is safe in an unselected and heterogeneous group of patients with varying clinical settings.