Mintz G S, Popma J J, Pichard A D, Kent K M, Satler L F, Chuang Y C, DeFalco R A, Leon M B
Intravascular Ultrasound Imaging and Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories, Washington (DC) Hospital Center, 20010, USA.
Circulation. 1996 Mar 1;93(5):924-31. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.93.5.924.
Plaque distribution (eccentricity) may be a determinant of the success of transcatheter therapy, and certain devices may be better suited to treating severely eccentric lesions than others. However, no study has compared methods for assessing plaque distribution or systematically studied the validity of the angiographic assessment of plaque distribution.
We studied 1446 native vessel target lesions in 1349 patients by intravascular ultrasound and coronary angiography. Angiographic and intravascular ultrasound criteria for lesion eccentricity were compared. Angiography showed that 795 of 1446 (55.0%) of target lesions were eccentric. When intravascular ultrasound was used, only 219 lesions (15.1%) had an arc of normal arterial wall within the lesion (equivalent to the pathological definition of lesion eccentricity). When an eccentricity index of >/= 3.0 was used, intravascular ultrasound classified 659 lesions (45.6%) as eccentric. The concordance rates of classification were only 47.7% (versus lesions containing an arc of normal arterial wall) and 53.8% (versus lesions with an ultrasound eccentricity index of >/= 3.0). More eccentric lesions had larger lumen cross-sectional areas, smaller plaque plus media and external elastic membrane cross-sectional areas, and smaller arcs of calcium, suggesting that they may represent less advanced atherosclerotic disease.
There was significant discordance between angiography and ultrasound in assessing plaque distribution. Angiography appeared to detect lesion eccentricity more often than intravascular ultrasound. Furthermore, markedly eccentric lesions, in which there is an arc of normal vessel wall, were uncommon.
斑块分布(偏心性)可能是经导管治疗成功的一个决定因素,某些器械可能比其他器械更适合治疗严重偏心性病变。然而,尚无研究比较评估斑块分布的方法,也未系统研究血管造影评估斑块分布的有效性。
我们通过血管内超声和冠状动脉造影研究了1349例患者的1446处天然血管靶病变。比较了病变偏心性的血管造影和血管内超声标准。血管造影显示,1446处靶病变中有795处(55.0%)为偏心性病变。使用血管内超声时,病变内仅有219处病变(15.1%)有正常动脉壁弧(相当于病变偏心性的病理定义)。当偏心指数≥3.0时,血管内超声将659处病变(45.6%)分类为偏心性病变。分类的一致性率仅为47.7%(与含有正常动脉壁弧的病变相比)和53.8%(与超声偏心指数≥3.0的病变相比)。偏心性更高的病变具有更大的管腔横截面积、更小的斑块加中膜和外弹力膜横截面积以及更小的钙化弧,提示它们可能代表较不严重的动脉粥样硬化疾病。
血管造影和超声在评估斑块分布方面存在显著不一致。血管造影似乎比血管内超声更常检测到病变偏心性。此外,存在正常血管壁弧的明显偏心性病变并不常见。