Quantitative angiographic follow-up studies on the development of coronary artery disease: which coronary segments should be analyzed? Experience from INTACT.

Angiographic follow-up studies on the evolution of coronary artery disease are of increasing relevance. It has still to be evaluated which coronary segments are predominantly involved in the process of atherosclerosis and, thus, should be preferably included in the analysis. Therefore, the correlation of progression and regression of coronary disease with the diameter and location (proximal, mid or distal) of coronary segments was investigated from the data of the INTACT-study, in which 25 different coronary segments were defined including anatomic variants of rather distal segments. In 348 patients with coronary artery disease, standardized coronary angiograms were repeated within 3 years and were quantitatively analyzed (CAAS). In 1063 coronary stenoses (% diameter stenosis > 20%) compared from both angiograms, progression and regression were not influenced by diameter nor location of arterial segments. In the follow-up angiograms, the number of new lesions (stenoses and occlusions) per coronary segment differed with regard to segment diameter (> 3 mm: 64/1125 (6%); 2-3 mm: 139/1967 (7%); < 2 mm: 44/1756 (2%); p < 0.001) and location of segments (proximal: 86/1285 (7%); mid: 84/1193 (7%); distal: 77/2370 (3%); p < 0.001). Out of 77 distal new lesions, only 25 (32%) were found in segments < 2 mm in diameter. Since the absolute number of new lesions was high in distal coronary segments, but low in segments with diameters < 2 mm, angiographic follow-up studies should analyze coronary segments at any location, but may neglect segments with diameters smaller than 2 mm.