Objectives:To assess the impact of intravascular ultrasound(IVUS)guidance for drug-eluting stent(DES)implantation on the long-term outcomes in coronary artery disease(CAD)patients with chronic kidney disease(CKD).Methods:A retrospective study was conducted on 1 800 CAD and CKD patients who underwent coronary DES implantation at Nanjing First Hospital from January 2018 to December 2022.Patients were divided into IVUS-guided group(IVUS group,n=333)and angiography-guided group(angiography group,n=1 467).Propensity score matching(PSM)was performed at a 1:2 ratio to adjust for differences in baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics between the two groups.Major adverse cardiovascular events(MACE),including cardiac death,target vessel myocardial infarction,and clinically driven target vessel revascularization,were evaluated over a 2-year follow-up.Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to identify independent predictors of MACE.Results:After propensity score matching,333 patients in the IVUS group were matched with 666 patients in the angiography group.Following matching,there were no significant differences in clinical characteristics and angiographic data between the two groups(all P>0.05).Regarding procedural data,IVUS group had a higher number of stents implanted,longer total stent length,larger average stent diameter,more frequent use of post-dilation balloons,larger post-dilation balloon diameter,and greater contrast agent usage(all P<0.05).MACE rate was significantly higher in the angiography group than that in the IVUS group(23.9%vs.18.0%,P=0.037).The difference was mainly attributed to a higher rate of cardiac death in the angiography group(16.1%vs.10.8%,P=0.013).Additionally,patients in angiography group had a significantly higher all-cause mortality rate compared to IVUS group(19.7%vs.13.8%,P=0.022).Multivariate cox regression analysis showed that IVUS guidance(HR=0.73,95%CI:0.55-0.99,P=0.042)was an independent protective factor,while hypertension(HR=1.60,95%CI:1.13-2.26,P=0.008),type 2 diabetes(HR=1.56,95%CI:1.19-2.05,P=0.001),acute coronary syndrome(HR=1.92,95%CI:1.12-3.30,P=0.018),and moderate to severe calcification(HR=1.55,95%CI:1.18-2.04,P=0.002)were independent risk factors for MACE at 2 years after DES implantation in CKD patients.Conclusions:Patients with CAD and CKD,IVUS-guided DES implantation is associated with a reduced risk of MACE and all-cause mortality at 2 years post-procedure compared to coronary angiography-guided implantation.

Objectives:To assess the impact of intravascular ultrasound(IVUS)guidance for drug-eluting stent(DES)implantation on the long-term outcomes in coronary artery disease(CAD)patients with chronic kidney disease(CKD).Methods:A retrospective study was conducted on 1 800 CAD and CKD patients who underwent coronary DES implantation at Nanjing First Hospital from January 2018 to December 2022.Patients were divided into IVUS-guided group(IVUS group,n=333)and angiography-guided group(angiography group,n=1 467).Propensity score matching(PSM)was performed at a 1:2 ratio to adjust for differences in baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics between the two groups.Major adverse cardiovascular events(MACE),including cardiac death,target vessel myocardial infarction,and clinically driven target vessel revascularization,were evaluated over a 2-year follow-up.Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to identify independent predictors of MACE.Results:After propensity score matching,333 patients in the IVUS group were matched with 666 patients in the angiography group.Following matching,there were no significant differences in clinical characteristics and angiographic data between the two groups(all P>0.05).Regarding procedural data,IVUS group had a higher number of stents implanted,longer total stent length,larger average stent diameter,more frequent use of post-dilation balloons,larger post-dilation balloon diameter,and greater contrast agent usage(all P<0.05).MACE rate was significantly higher in the angiography group than that in the IVUS group(23.9%vs.18.0%,P=0.037).The difference was mainly attributed to a higher rate of cardiac death in the angiography group(16.1%vs.10.8%,P=0.013).Additionally,patients in angiography group had a significantly higher all-cause mortality rate compared to IVUS group(19.7%vs.13.8%,P=0.022).Multivariate cox regression analysis showed that IVUS guidance(HR=0.73,95%CI:0.55-0.99,P=0.042)was an independent protective factor,while hypertension(HR=1.60,95%CI:1.13-2.26,P=0.008),type 2 diabetes(HR=1.56,95%CI:1.19-2.05,P=0.001),acute coronary syndrome(HR=1.92,95%CI:1.12-3.30,P=0.018),and moderate to severe calcification(HR=1.55,95%CI:1.18-2.04,P=0.002)were independent risk factors for MACE at 2 years after DES implantation in CKD patients.Conclusions:Patients with CAD and CKD,IVUS-guided DES implantation is associated with a reduced risk of MACE and all-cause mortality at 2 years post-procedure compared to coronary angiography-guided implantation.

Objective:To explore the long-term effects of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance on patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation.Methods:Data used in this study derived from ULTIMATE trial, which was a prospective, multicenter, randomized study. A total of 1 448 all-comer patients were enrolled between 2014 August and 2017 May. Primary endpoint of this study was target vessel failure (TVF) at 3 years, including cardiac death, target-vessel-related myocardial infarction, and clinically-driven target vessel revascularization.Results:ACS was present in 1 136 (78.5%) patients, and 3-year clinical follow-up was available in 1 423 patients (98.3%). TVF in the ACS group was 9.6% (109/1 136), which was significantly higher than 4.5% (14/312) in the non-ACS group (log-rank P=0.005). There were 109 TVFs in the ACS patients, with 7.6% (43/569) TVFs in the IVUS group and 11.6% (66/567) TVFs in the angiography group (log-rank P=0.019). Moreover, patients with optimal IVUS guidance were associated with a lower risk of 3-year TVF compared to those with suboptimal IVUS results (5.4% (16/296) vs. 9.9% (27/273),log-rank P=0.041). Conclusions:This ULTIMATE-ACS subgroup analysis showed that ACS patients undergoing DES implantation were associated with a higher risk of 3-year TVF. More importantly, the risk of TVF could be significantly decreased through IVUS guidance in patients with ACS, especially in those who had an IVUS-defined optimal procedure.

Objective Analyzes the grouping effect and its influencing factors under DRG payment,provides reference for the reform of DRG payment.Methods Evaluates the effectiveness of DRG grouping using Coefficient of Variation(CV)and Reduction in Variance;using Value of Structure of Variation and Degree of Structure Variation,analyzes hospitalization costs structure changes of different DRG groups,and calculates the degree of correlation between average hospitalization costs through grey relational analysis;using non parametric tests and multiple regression to analyze the influencing factors of hospitalization cost.Results DRG grouping effect was not good,inter-group heterogeneity was not obvious;the structure of hospitalization expenses is unreasonable,and the proportion of consumables expenses is too high,ranking first in the grey correlation degree of hospitalization expenses,comprehensive medical service fees and treatment fees rank third and fifth respectively;the main factors affecting hospitalization costs are treatment methods,length of stay,presence of complications,and first hospitalization,the difference is statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusion More grouping nodes or higher CV value standards should be added to enhance the grouping effect of gastric cancer DRG;optimize the structure of hospitalization costs to reflect the labor and technical value of medical personnel;strengthen internal management and control the unreasonable use of drugs and consumables.

Objective Analyzes the grouping effect and its influencing factors under DRG payment,provides reference for the reform of DRG payment.Methods Evaluates the effectiveness of DRG grouping using Coefficient of Variation(CV)and Reduction in Variance;using Value of Structure of Variation and Degree of Structure Variation,analyzes hospitalization costs structure changes of different DRG groups,and calculates the degree of correlation between average hospitalization costs through grey relational analysis;using non parametric tests and multiple regression to analyze the influencing factors of hospitalization cost.Results DRG grouping effect was not good,inter-group heterogeneity was not obvious;the structure of hospitalization expenses is unreasonable,and the proportion of consumables expenses is too high,ranking first in the grey correlation degree of hospitalization expenses,comprehensive medical service fees and treatment fees rank third and fifth respectively;the main factors affecting hospitalization costs are treatment methods,length of stay,presence of complications,and first hospitalization,the difference is statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusion More grouping nodes or higher CV value standards should be added to enhance the grouping effect of gastric cancer DRG;optimize the structure of hospitalization costs to reflect the labor and technical value of medical personnel;strengthen internal management and control the unreasonable use of drugs and consumables.

Objective Analyzes the grouping effect and its influencing factors under DRG payment,provides reference for the reform of DRG payment.Methods Evaluates the effectiveness of DRG grouping using Coefficient of Variation(CV)and Reduction in Variance;using Value of Structure of Variation and Degree of Structure Variation,analyzes hospitalization costs structure changes of different DRG groups,and calculates the degree of correlation between average hospitalization costs through grey relational analysis;using non parametric tests and multiple regression to analyze the influencing factors of hospitalization cost.Results DRG grouping effect was not good,inter-group heterogeneity was not obvious;the structure of hospitalization expenses is unreasonable,and the proportion of consumables expenses is too high,ranking first in the grey correlation degree of hospitalization expenses,comprehensive medical service fees and treatment fees rank third and fifth respectively;the main factors affecting hospitalization costs are treatment methods,length of stay,presence of complications,and first hospitalization,the difference is statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusion More grouping nodes or higher CV value standards should be added to enhance the grouping effect of gastric cancer DRG;optimize the structure of hospitalization costs to reflect the labor and technical value of medical personnel;strengthen internal management and control the unreasonable use of drugs and consumables.

Objective Analyzes the grouping effect and its influencing factors under DRG payment,provides reference for the reform of DRG payment.Methods Evaluates the effectiveness of DRG grouping using Coefficient of Variation(CV)and Reduction in Variance;using Value of Structure of Variation and Degree of Structure Variation,analyzes hospitalization costs structure changes of different DRG groups,and calculates the degree of correlation between average hospitalization costs through grey relational analysis;using non parametric tests and multiple regression to analyze the influencing factors of hospitalization cost.Results DRG grouping effect was not good,inter-group heterogeneity was not obvious;the structure of hospitalization expenses is unreasonable,and the proportion of consumables expenses is too high,ranking first in the grey correlation degree of hospitalization expenses,comprehensive medical service fees and treatment fees rank third and fifth respectively;the main factors affecting hospitalization costs are treatment methods,length of stay,presence of complications,and first hospitalization,the difference is statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusion More grouping nodes or higher CV value standards should be added to enhance the grouping effect of gastric cancer DRG;optimize the structure of hospitalization costs to reflect the labor and technical value of medical personnel;strengthen internal management and control the unreasonable use of drugs and consumables.

Objective Analyzes the grouping effect and its influencing factors under DRG payment,provides reference for the reform of DRG payment.Methods Evaluates the effectiveness of DRG grouping using Coefficient of Variation(CV)and Reduction in Variance;using Value of Structure of Variation and Degree of Structure Variation,analyzes hospitalization costs structure changes of different DRG groups,and calculates the degree of correlation between average hospitalization costs through grey relational analysis;using non parametric tests and multiple regression to analyze the influencing factors of hospitalization cost.Results DRG grouping effect was not good,inter-group heterogeneity was not obvious;the structure of hospitalization expenses is unreasonable,and the proportion of consumables expenses is too high,ranking first in the grey correlation degree of hospitalization expenses,comprehensive medical service fees and treatment fees rank third and fifth respectively;the main factors affecting hospitalization costs are treatment methods,length of stay,presence of complications,and first hospitalization,the difference is statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusion More grouping nodes or higher CV value standards should be added to enhance the grouping effect of gastric cancer DRG;optimize the structure of hospitalization costs to reflect the labor and technical value of medical personnel;strengthen internal management and control the unreasonable use of drugs and consumables.

Objective Analyzes the grouping effect and its influencing factors under DRG payment,provides reference for the reform of DRG payment.Methods Evaluates the effectiveness of DRG grouping using Coefficient of Variation(CV)and Reduction in Variance;using Value of Structure of Variation and Degree of Structure Variation,analyzes hospitalization costs structure changes of different DRG groups,and calculates the degree of correlation between average hospitalization costs through grey relational analysis;using non parametric tests and multiple regression to analyze the influencing factors of hospitalization cost.Results DRG grouping effect was not good,inter-group heterogeneity was not obvious;the structure of hospitalization expenses is unreasonable,and the proportion of consumables expenses is too high,ranking first in the grey correlation degree of hospitalization expenses,comprehensive medical service fees and treatment fees rank third and fifth respectively;the main factors affecting hospitalization costs are treatment methods,length of stay,presence of complications,and first hospitalization,the difference is statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusion More grouping nodes or higher CV value standards should be added to enhance the grouping effect of gastric cancer DRG;optimize the structure of hospitalization costs to reflect the labor and technical value of medical personnel;strengthen internal management and control the unreasonable use of drugs and consumables.

Objective Analyzes the grouping effect and its influencing factors under DRG payment,provides reference for the reform of DRG payment.Methods Evaluates the effectiveness of DRG grouping using Coefficient of Variation(CV)and Reduction in Variance;using Value of Structure of Variation and Degree of Structure Variation,analyzes hospitalization costs structure changes of different DRG groups,and calculates the degree of correlation between average hospitalization costs through grey relational analysis;using non parametric tests and multiple regression to analyze the influencing factors of hospitalization cost.Results DRG grouping effect was not good,inter-group heterogeneity was not obvious;the structure of hospitalization expenses is unreasonable,and the proportion of consumables expenses is too high,ranking first in the grey correlation degree of hospitalization expenses,comprehensive medical service fees and treatment fees rank third and fifth respectively;the main factors affecting hospitalization costs are treatment methods,length of stay,presence of complications,and first hospitalization,the difference is statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusion More grouping nodes or higher CV value standards should be added to enhance the grouping effect of gastric cancer DRG;optimize the structure of hospitalization costs to reflect the labor and technical value of medical personnel;strengthen internal management and control the unreasonable use of drugs and consumables.