CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

急性冠脉综合征

Abstract

Recommended Article

Another Nail in the Coffin for Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsion in Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock Invasive Versus Medical Management in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery With a Non-ST Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Long-term outcomes after myocardial infarction in middle-aged and older patients with congenital heart disease-a nationwide study Outcome of Applying the ESC 0/1-hour Algorithm in Patients With Suspected Myocardial Infarction Effects of clopidogrel vs. prasugrel vs. ticagrelor on endothelial function, inflammatory parameters, and platelet function in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing coronary artery stenting: a randomized, blinded, parallel study Refractory Angina: From Pathophysiology to New Therapeutic Nonpharmacological Technologies No causal effects of plasma homocysteine levels on the risk of coronary heart disease or acute myocardial infarction: A Mendelian randomization study Systems of Care for ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association

Original Research2017 May 15;119(10):1512-1517.

JOURNAL:Am J Cardiol. Article Link

Comparison of Coronary Intimal Plaques by Optical Coherence Tomography in Arteries With Versus Without Internal Running Vasa Vasorum

Amano H, Koizumi M, Okubo R et al. Keywords: OCT; internal running vasa vasorum; plaque vulnerability; blood flow

ABSTRACT


It has been reported that the internal running vasa vasorum (VV) was associated with plaque vulnerability, and microchannels in optical coherence tomography (OCT) are consistent pathologically with VV. We investigated plaque vulnerability and incidence of slow flow during percutaneous coronary intervention of the internal longitudinal running VV. Subjects were 71 lesions that underwent OCT before percutaneous coronary intervention. Internal running VV was defined as intraplaque neovessels running from the adventitia to plaque. Lesions with internal running VV were found in 47% (33 of 71). Compared with lesions without internal running VV, lesions with internal running VV showed significantly higher incidence of intimal laceration (64% [21 of 33] vs 16% [6 of 38], p <0.001), lipid-rich plaque (79% [26 of 33] vs 26% [10 of 38], p <0.001), plaque rupture (52% [17 of 33] vs 13% [5 of 38], p <0.001), thin-cap fibroatheroma (58% [19 of 33] vs 11% [4 of 38], p <0.001), macrophage accumulation (61% [20 of 33] vs 26% [10 of 38], p = 0.004), intraluminal thrombus (36% [12 of 33] vs 3% [1 of 38], p <0.001), and slow flow after stent implantation (42% [14 of 33] vs 13% [5 of 38], p = 0.007). The multivariable analysis showed that internal running VV was an independent predictor of slow flow after stent implantation (odds ratio 4.23, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 17.01, p = 0.042). In conclusion, compared with those without, plaques with internal running VV in OCT had high plaque vulnerability with more intimal laceration, lipid-rich plaque, plaque rupture, thin-cap fibroatheroma, macrophage accumulation, and intraluminal thrombus, and they had high incidence of slow flow after stent implantation.