The relationships between intracoronary imaging modalities and outcomes among Japanese patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) based on the type of medical facility providing outpatient care remain unclear. In this multicenter prospective study (SAKURA PCI Registry), we aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients with CAD who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between April 2015 and December 2018. In this registry, we investigated differences in patient characteristics, intracoronary imaging modalities, and clinical outcomes between two types of medical facilities. Of the 414 patients enrolled in this registry, 196 were treated at two university hospitals, and 218 were treated at five community hospitals (median follow-up 11.0 months). The primary endpoint was clinically relevant events (CREs), including a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, stent thrombosis, stroke, and major bleeding. Patients treated at university hospitals had higher rates of diabetes (50% vs. 38%, p = 0.015) and malignant tumors (12% vs. 6%, p = 0.015) and more frequent use of multiple intracoronary imaging modalities than patients treated at community hospitals (21% vs. 0.5%, p < 0.001). The Kaplan–Meier incidence of CREs at 1 year was comparable between university hospitals and community hospitals (8.8% vs. 7.3%, p = 0.527, log-rank test). Despite the relatively higher risk among patients in university hospitals with frequent use of multi-intracoronary imaging modalities, adverse clinical events appeared to be comparable between patients with CAD treated at university and community hospitals in Japan.

基于提供门诊治疗的医疗机构类型，日本冠状动脉疾病 (CAD) 患者的冠状动脉内成像方式与结果之间的关系仍不清楚。在这项多中心前瞻性研究（SAKURA PCI 注册）中，我们旨在调查 2015 年 4 月至 2018 年 12 月期间接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗（PCI）的 CAD 患者的临床结果。在该注册中，我们调查了患者特征、冠状动脉内成像的差异两种医疗设施之间的模式和临床结果。在该登记注册的 414 名患者中，196 名在两家大学医院接受治疗，218 名在五家社区医院接受治疗（中位随访时间 11.0 个月）。主要终点是临床相关事件（CRE），包括全因死亡、非致死性心肌梗死、临床驱动的靶病变血运重建、支架内血栓形成、中风和大出血。在大学医院接受治疗的患者糖尿病发病率较高（50% 对 38%，p  = 0.015）和恶性肿瘤（12% vs. 6%，p  = 0.015），并且比在社区医院接受治疗的患者更频繁地使用多种冠状动脉内成像方式（21% vs. 0.5%，p  < 0.001）。大学医院和社区医院在 1 年时 CRE 的 Kaplan-Meier 发生率具有可比性（8.8% 对 7.3%，p  = 0.527，对数秩检验）。尽管经常使用多冠脉内成像方式的大学医院患者的风险相对较高，但在日本大学医院和社区医院接受治疗的 CAD 患者的不良临床事件似乎相当。