CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

光学相关断层扫描

Abstract

Recommended Article

Assessment of the coronary calcification by optical coherence tomography Optical coherence tomography versus intravascular ultrasound to evaluate coronary artery disease and percutaneous coronary intervention Impact of an optical coherence tomography guided approach in acute coronary syndromes: A propensity matched analysis from the international FORMIDABLE-CARDIOGROUP IV and USZ registry Fate of post-procedural malapposition of everolimus-eluting polymeric bioresorbable scaffold and everolimus-eluting cobalt chromiummetallic stent in human coronary arteries: sequential assessment with optical coherence tomography in ABSORB Japan trial Characteristics of abnormal post-stent optical coherence tomography findings in hemodialysis patients Optical coherence tomography predictors of target vessel myocardial infarction after provisional stenting in patients with coronary bifurcation disease Intravascular optical coherence tomography Optimal threshold of postintervention minimum stent area to predict in-stent restenosis in small coronary arteries: An optical coherence tomography analysis

Original Research2011 Jan;6(6):768-72.

JOURNAL:EuroIntervention. Article Link

Assessment of the coronary calcification by optical coherence tomography

Kume T, Okura H, Kawamoto T et al. Keywords: coronary artery disease; IVUS; OCT

ABSTRACT

AIMS - Optical coherence tomography (OCT) can delineate calcified plaque without artefacts. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of OCT to quantify calcified plaque in ex vivo human coronary arteries.

METHODS AND RESULTS - Ninety-one coronary segments from 33 consecutive human cadavers were examined. By intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), 32 superficial calcified plaques, defined as the leading edge of the acoustic shadowing appears within the most shallow 50% of the plaque plus media thickness, were selected and compared with corresponding OCT and histological examinations. The area of calcification was measured by planimetry. IVUS significantly underestimated the area of calcification compared with histological examination (y = 0.39x + 0.14, r = 0.78, p < 0.001). Although OCT slightly underestimated the area of calcification (y = 0.67x + 0.53, r = 0.84, p < 0.001), it showed a better correlation with histological examination than IVUS.

CONCLUSIONS - Both OCT and IVUS underestimated the area of calcification, but OCT estimates of the area of calcification were more accurate than those estimated by IVUS. Thus, OCT may be a more useful clinical tool to quantify calcified plaque.