Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation and Management of the Vulnerable Plaque

  • Secondary Prevention and Intervention (D. Steinberg, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Cardiovascular Risk Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Coronary plaque rupture is the dominant mechanism of acute myocardial infarction and sudden coronary death. If we are to make a major inroads on reducing morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease, more accurate prediction of an individual’s near-term cardiovascular risk (i.e., prediction of future coronary events) than what we can offer today is the ultimate goal to enable a more patient-tailored treatment strategy for coronary artery disease. In this review, we address the value of the vulnerable plaque concept in the context of an integrative cardiovascular risk assessment.

Recent Findings

Even with today’s state-of-the-art intravascular and non-invasive imaging, the identification of plaques at high-risk for rupture remains an elusive task albeit one in which important progress continues to be made. The vulnerable plaque concept emerged from the identification of morphological characteristics associated with plaque rupture as identified by autopsy studies. However, morphology alone may only be one of many factors which drive plaque progression. Therefore, the usefulness of the classical vulnerable plaque concept for predicting an individual’s cardiovascular risk clearly remains in the research realm. Nonetheless, the potential of being able to predict events before they happen remains an issue of utmost importance for cardiology.

Summary

The identification of patients at risk for adverse cardiovascular events requires a comprehensive risk assessment. Invasive and non-invasive coronary imaging techniques allow for a detailed detection of vulnerable plaque characteristics. In combination with systemic factors that increase the disease’s activity, the finding that an individual may harbor coronary plaques with vulnerable characteristics indicates elevated atherosclerotic disease risk and thus justifies a more intensive therapeutic approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, Go AS, Arnett DK, Blaha MJ, Cushman M, et al. Executive summary: Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics--2016 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016;133(4):447–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bentzon JF, Otsuka F, Virmani R, Falk E. Mechanisms of plaque formation and rupture. Circ Res. 2014;114(12):1852–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Finn AV, Nakano M, Narula J, Kolodgie FD, Virmani R. Concept of vulnerable/unstable plaque. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2010;30(7):1282–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Virmani R, Kolodgie FD, Burke AP, Farb A, Schwartz SM. Lessons from sudden coronary death: a comprehensive morphological classification scheme for atherosclerotic lesions. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2000;20(5):1262–75.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Falk E, Nakano M, Bentzon JF, Finn AV, Virmani R. Update on acute coronary syndromes: the pathologists’ view. Eur Heart J. 2013;34(10):719–28.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schaar JA, Muller JE, Falk E, Virmani R, Fuster V, Serruys PW, et al. Terminology for high-risk and vulnerable coronary artery plaques. Report of a meeting on the vulnerable plaque, June 17 and 18, 2003, Santorini, Greece. Eur Heart J. 2004;25(12):1077–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Otsuka F, Joner M, Prati F, Virmani R, Narula J. Clinical classification of plaque morphology in coronary disease. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2014;11(7):379–89.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Higuma T, Soeda T, Abe N, Yamada M, Yokoyama H, Shibutani S, et al. A combined optical coherence tomography and intravascular ultrasound study on plaque rupture, plaque erosion, and calcified nodule in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: incidence, morphologic characteristics, and outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(9):1166–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jia H, Abtahian F, Aguirre AD, Lee S, Chia S, Lowe H, et al. In vivo diagnosis of plaque erosion and calcified nodule in patients with acute coronary syndrome by intravascular optical coherence tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62(19):1748–58.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Farb A, Burke AP, Tang AL, Liang TY, Mannan P, Smialek J, et al. Coronary plaque erosion without rupture into a lipid core. A frequent cause of coronary thrombosis in sudden coronary death. Circulation. 1996;93(7):1354–63.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Burke AP, Farb A, Malcom GT, Liang Y, Smialek J, Virmani R. Effect of risk factors on the mechanism of acute thrombosis and sudden coronary death in women. Circulation. 1998;97(21):2110–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Virmani R, Burke AP, Farb A. Plaque rupture and plaque erosion. Thromb Haemost. 1999;82(Suppl 1):1–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Taylor AJ, Burke AP, O’Malley PG, Farb A, Malcom GT, Smialek J, et al. A comparison of the Framingham risk index, coronary artery calcification, and culprit plaque morphology in sudden cardiac death. Circulation. 2000;101(11):1243–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Campbell IC, Timmins LH, Giddens DP, Virmani R, Veneziani A, Rab ST, et al. Computational fluid dynamics simulations of hemodynamics in plaque erosion. Cardiovasc Eng Technol. 2013;4(4):464–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13239-013-0165-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. • Kobayashi N, Takano M, Tsurumi M, Shibata Y, Nishigoori S, Uchiyama S, et al. Features and outcomes of patients with calcified nodules at culprit lesions of acute coronary syndrome: an optical coherence tomography study. Cardiology. 2018;139(2):90–100 This OCT study by Kobayashi et al. assessed culprit lesion plaque morphologies in ACS patients and classified them as calcified nodules, plaque rupture, and plaque erosion. Beneath the assessment of prevalences in a clinical setting, the main finding was that ACS patients with calcified nodules at the culprit lesion had more target lesion revascularization compared with those with plaque rupture or plaque erosion.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. • Yahagi K, Kolodgie FD, Otsuka F, Finn AV, Davis HR, Joner M, et al. Pathophysiology of native coronary, vein graft, and in-stent atherosclerosis. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2016;13(2):79–98 Comprehensive review of the pathology of native coronary artery disease as well as that seen in vein grafts and in coronary stents.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Muller JE, Tofler GH, Stone PH. Circadian variation and triggers of onset of acute cardiovascular disease. Circulation. 1989;79(4):733–43.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Muller JE, Abela GS, Nesto RW, Tofler GH. Triggers, acute risk factors and vulnerable plaques: the lexicon of a new frontier. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994;23(3):809–13.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Burke AP, Farb A, Malcom GT, Liang YH, Smialek J, Virmani R. Coronary risk factors and plaque morphology in men with coronary disease who died suddenly. N Engl J Med. 1997;336(18):1276–82.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Virmani R, Burke AP, Farb A, Kolodgie FD. Pathology of the vulnerable plaque. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(8 Suppl):C13–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kolodgie FD, Burke AP, Farb A, Gold HK, Yuan J, Narula J, et al. The thin-cap fibroatheroma: a type of vulnerable plaque: the major precursor lesion to acute coronary syndromes. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2001;16(5):285–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kolodgie FD, Virmani R, Burke AP, Farb A, Weber DK, Kutys R, et al. Pathologic assessment of the vulnerable human coronary plaque. Heart. 2004;90(12):1385–91.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Stary HC, Chandler AB, Dinsmore RE, Fuster V, Glagov S, Insull W Jr, et al. A definition of advanced types of atherosclerotic lesions and a histological classification of atherosclerosis. A report from the Committee on Vascular Lesions of the Council on Arteriosclerosis, American Heart Association. Circulation. 1995;92(5):1355–74.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Libby P, Schoenbeck U, Mach F, Selwyn AP, Ganz P. Current concepts in cardiovascular pathology: the role of LDL cholesterol in plaque rupture and stabilization. Am J Med. 1998;104(2a):14s–8s.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Burke AP, Virmani R, Galis Z, Haudenschild CC, Muller JE. 34th Bethesda Conference: Task force #2--What is the pathologic basis for new atherosclerosis imaging techniques? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41(11):1874–86.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cheruvu PK, Finn AV, Gardner C, Caplan J, Goldstein J, Stone GW, et al. Frequency and distribution of thin-cap fibroatheroma and ruptured plaques in human coronary arteries: a pathologic study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50(10):940–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wang JC, Normand SL, Mauri L, Kuntz RE. Coronary artery spatial distribution of acute myocardial infarction occlusions. Circulation. 2004;110(3):278–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Falk E, Shah PK, Fuster V. Coronary plaque disruption. Circulation. 1995;92(3):657–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Shah PK, Falk E, Badimon JJ, Fernandez-Ortiz A, Mailhac A, Villareal-Levy G, et al. Human monocyte-derived macrophages induce collagen breakdown in fibrous caps of atherosclerotic plaques. Potential role of matrix-degrading metalloproteinases and implications for plaque rupture. Circulation. 1995;92(6):1565–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Moreno PR, Falk E, Palacios IF, Newell JB, Fuster V, Fallon JT. Macrophage infiltration in acute coronary syndromes. Implications for plaque rupture. Circulation. 1994;90(2):775–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Galis ZS, Sukhova GK, Lark MW, Libby P. Increased expression of matrix metalloproteinases and matrix degrading activity in vulnerable regions of human atherosclerotic plaques. J Clin Invest. 1994;94(6):2493–503.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Sukhova GK, Schonbeck U, Rabkin E, Schoen FJ, Poole AR, Billinghurst RC, et al. Evidence for increased collagenolysis by interstitial collagenases-1 and -3 in vulnerable human atheromatous plaques. Circulation. 1999;99(19):2503–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Virmani R, Kolodgie FD, Burke AP, Finn AV, Gold HK, Tulenko TN, et al. Atherosclerotic plaque progression and vulnerability to rupture: angiogenesis as a source of intraplaque hemorrhage. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2005;25(10):2054–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Takaya N, Yuan C, Chu B, Saam T, Polissar NL, Jarvik GP, et al. Presence of intraplaque hemorrhage stimulates progression of carotid atherosclerotic plaques: a high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging study. Circulation. 2005;111(21):2768–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Bourantas CV, Garcia-Garcia HM, Farooq V, Maehara A, Xu K, Genereux P, et al. Clinical and angiographic characteristics of patients likely to have vulnerable plaques: analysis from the PROSPECT study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;6(12):1263–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Fleg JL, Stone GW, Fayad ZA, Granada JF, Hatsukami TS, Kolodgie FD, et al. Detection of high-risk atherosclerotic plaque: report of the NHLBI Working Group on current status and future directions. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5(9):941–55.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Stone GW, Maehara A, Lansky AJ, de Bruyne B, Cristea E, Mintz GS, et al. A prospective natural-history study of coronary atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(3):226–35.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Calvert PA, Obaid DR, O’Sullivan M, Shapiro LM, McNab D, Densem CG, et al. Association between IVUS findings and adverse outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease: the VIVA (VH-IVUS in Vulnerable Atherosclerosis) Study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4(8):894–901.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kume T, Akasaka T, Kawamoto T, Okura H, Watanabe N, Toyota E, et al. Measurement of the thickness of the fibrous cap by optical coherence tomography. Am Heart J. 2006;152(4):755.e1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Narula J, Nakano M, Virmani R, Kolodgie FD, Petersen R, Newcomb R, et al. Histopathologic characteristics of atherosclerotic coronary disease and implications of the findings for the invasive and noninvasive detection of vulnerable plaques. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(10):1041–51.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Tian J, Ren X, Vergallo R, Xing L, Yu H, Jia H, et al. Distinct morphological features of ruptured culprit plaque for acute coronary events compared to those with silent rupture and thin-cap fibroatheroma: a combined optical coherence tomography and intravascular ultrasound study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(21):2209–16.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tian J, Dauerman H, Toma C, Samady H, Itoh T, Kuramitsu S, et al. Prevalence and characteristics of TCFA and degree of coronary artery stenosis: an OCT, IVUS, and angiographic study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(7):672–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sinclair H, Bourantas C, Bagnall A, Mintz GS, Kunadian V. OCT for the identification of vulnerable plaque in acute coronary syndrome. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8(2):198–209.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Waksman R, Torguson R, Spad MA, Garcia-Garcia H, Ware J, Wang R, et al. The Lipid-Rich Plaque Study of vulnerable plaques and vulnerable patients: study design and rationale. Am Heart J. 2017;192:98–104.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Waksman R. Assessment of coronary near-infrared spectroscopy imaging to detect vulnerable plaques and vulnerable patients. Presented at: TCT 2018. September 24, 2018, San Diego, CA.

  46. Stone GW, Maehara A, Mintz GS. The reality of vulnerable plaque detection. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4(8):902–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Arbab-Zadeh A, Fuster V. The myth of the “vulnerable plaque”: transitioning from a focus on individual lesions to atherosclerotic disease burden for coronary artery disease risk assessment. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65(8):846–55.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Mann J, Davies MJ. Mechanisms of progression in native coronary artery disease: role of healed plaque disruption. Heart. 1999;82(3):265–8.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Burke AP, Kolodgie FD, Farb A, Weber DK, Malcom GT, Smialek J, et al. Healed plaque ruptures and sudden coronary death: evidence that subclinical rupture has a role in plaque progression. Circulation. 2001;103(7):934–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kubo T, Maehara A, Mintz GS, Doi H, Tsujita K, Choi SY, et al. The dynamic nature of coronary artery lesion morphology assessed by serial virtual histology intravascular ultrasound tissue characterization. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(15):1590–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Naghavi M, Libby P, Falk E, Casscells SW, Litovsky S, Rumberger J, et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerable patient: a call for new definitions and risk assessment strategies: part I. Circulation. 2003;108(14):1664–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Naghavi M, Libby P, Falk E, Casscells SW, Litovsky S, Rumberger J, et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerable patient: a call for new definitions and risk assessment strategies: part II. Circulation. 2003;108(15):1772–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Manoharan G, Ntalianis A, Muller O, Hamilos M, Sarno G, Melikian N, et al. Severity of coronary arterial stenoses responsible for acute coronary syndromes. Am J Cardiol. 2009;103(9):1183–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Glaser R, Selzer F, Faxon DP, Laskey WK, Cohen HA, Slater J, et al. Clinical progression of incidental, asymptomatic lesions discovered during culprit vessel coronary intervention. Circulation. 2005;111(2):143–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Yokoya K, Takatsu H, Suzuki T, Hosokawa H, Ojio S, Matsubara T, et al. Process of progression of coronary artery lesions from mild or moderate stenosis to moderate or severe stenosis: a study based on four serial coronary arteriograms per year. Circulation. 1999;100(9):903–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Glagov S, Weisenberg E, Zarins CK, Stankunavicius R, Kolettis GJ. Compensatory enlargement of human atherosclerotic coronary arteries. N Engl J Med. 1987;316(22):1371–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Kolodgie FD, Gold HK, Burke AP, Fowler DR, Kruth HS, Weber DK, et al. Intraplaque hemorrhage and progression of coronary atheroma. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(24):2316–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Kumamoto M, Nakashima Y, Sueishi K. Intimal neovascularization in human coronary atherosclerosis: its origin and pathophysiological significance. Hum Pathol. 1995;26(4):450–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. •• Ahmadi A, Leipsic J, Blankstein R, Taylor C, Hecht H, Stone GW, et al. Do plaques rapidly progress prior to myocardial infarction? The interplay between plaque vulnerability and progression. Circ Res. 2015;117(1):99–104 Ahmadi et al. challenge the perception in the cardiology community that most acute coronary events arise from ruptures of mildly stenotic plaques. They clarify that rapid plaque progression of moderately severe vulnerable plaques is the critical step before MI in most cases and provide evidence from serial angiographic as well as imaging studies. The authors propose the detection of the rate of plaque progression as an additional factor to identify vulnerable plaques with an increased potential for adverse outcomes.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Goff DC Jr, Lloyd-Jones DM, Bennett G, Coady S, D’Agostino RB, Gibbons R, et al. 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2014;129(25 Suppl 2):S49–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Wilson PW, D’Agostino RB, Levy D, Belanger AM, Silbershatz H, Kannel WB. Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. Circulation. 1998;97(18):1837–47.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Conroy RM, Pyorala K, Fitzgerald AP, Sans S, Menotti A, De Backer G, et al. Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease in Europe: the SCORE project. Eur Heart J. 2003;24(11):987–1003.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Goff DC Jr, Lloyd-Jones DM, Bennett G, Coady S, D’Agostino RB Sr, Gibbons R, et al. 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(25 Pt B):2935–59.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Wald NJ, Morris JK, Rish S. The efficacy of combining several risk factors as a screening test. J Med Screen. 2005;12(4):197–201.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Lauer MS. Primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: the high public burden of low individual risk. Jama. 2007;297(12):1376–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. •• Al Rifai M, Cainzos-Achirica M, Kianoush S, Mirbolouk M, Peng A, Comin-Colet J, et al. Coronary Artery Calcium: Recommendations for Risk Assessment in Cardiovascular Prevention Guidelines. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2018;20(11):89 Al Rifai et al. evaluate the coronary artery calcium (CAC) score as a biomarker for advanced atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk assessment and demonstrate a clear advantage of CAC compared with traditional and non-traditional cardiovascular risk factors. The authors recommend CAC especially for refining risk assessment among intermediate risk patients.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. • Takayama Y, Yasuda Y, Suzuki S, Shibata Y, Tatami Y, Shibata K, et al. Relationship between abdominal aortic and coronary artery calcification as detected by computed tomography in chronic kidney disease patients. Heart Vessel. 2016;31(7):1030–7 In this study, Takayama et al. investigate the relationship between abdominal aortic calcification and coronary artery calcification in chronic kidney disease patients by means of a non-contrast computed tomography scan. The aortic calcification index (ACI) was independently associated with severe CAC score and the addition of ACI to traditional risk factors significantly improved the predictive ability of severe CAC score. The authors suggest ACI as a screening tool in clinical practice.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Zweig BM, Sheth M, Simpson S, Al-Mallah MH. Association of abdominal aortic calcium with coronary artery calcium and obstructive coronary artery disease: a pilot study. Int J Card Imaging. 2012;28(2):399–404.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Allison MA, Hsi S, Wassel CL, Morgan C, Ix JH, Wright CM, et al. Calcified atherosclerosis in different vascular beds and the risk of mortality. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2012;32(1):140–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. • O’Connor SD, Graffy PM, Zea R, Pickhardt PJ. Does nonenhanced CT-based quantification of abdominal aortic calcification outperform the Framingham risk score in predicting cardiovascular events in asymptomatic adults? Radiology. 2019;290(1):108–15 O’Connor et al. demonstrate that non-contrast enhanced CT-based measurement of abdominal aortic calcification could strongly predict future cardiovascular events, outperforming the Framingham risk score, in 829 generally healthy asymptomatic adults in a 10-year follow-up.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Puchner SB, Liu T, Mayrhofer T, Truong QA, Lee H, Fleg JL, et al. High-risk plaque detected on coronary CT angiography predicts acute coronary syndromes independent of significant stenosis in acute chest pain: results from the ROMICAT-II trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(7):684–92.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. • Reinhardt SW, Lin CJ, Novak E, Brown DL. Noninvasive cardiac testing vs clinical evaluation alone in acute chest pain: a secondary analysis of the ROMICAT-II randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178(2):212–9 This retrospective analysis of data from ROMICAT II included 1000 patients who presented with chest pain and compared the outcomes after clinical evaluation and coronary computed tomographic angiography vs. clinical evaluation alone. Reinhardt et al. revealed a longer length of stay, more downstream testing, more radiation exposure, and greater cost without an improvement in clinical outcomes if patients presented with acute chest pain, but had negative biomarkers and a non-ischemic ECG result. This study underlines the importance of a common sense use of imaging methods.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. •• Lin JS, Evans CV, Johnson E, Redmond N, Coppola EL, Smith N, et al. Jama. 2018;320(3):281–97 This systematic review of 43 studies including 267,244 patients evaluates non-traditional risk factors (ankle-brachial index, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level, and coronary artery calcium score) in cardiovascular risk assessment. Lin et al. demonstrate a lack of direct evidence from adequately powered trials whether the addition of non-traditional risk factors will improve patient health outcomes. Thus, there is clearly a need for further research in this field, especially with regard to the finding of coronary artery calcium.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Grundy SM, Stone NJ, Bailey AL, Beam C, Birtcher KK, Blumenthal RS, et al. AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA guideline on the management of blood cholesterol. Circulation. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000625.

  75. Baigent C, Keech A, Kearney PM, Blackwell L, Buck G, Pollicino C, et al. Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90,056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins. Lancet. 2005;366(9493):1267–78.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S, Andreotti F, Arden C, Budaj A, et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the task force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2013;34(38):2949–3003.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. O’Gara PT, Kushner FG, Ascheim DD, Casey DE Jr, Chung MK, de Lemos JA, et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2013;127(4):e362–425.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Ray KK, Cannon CP. The potential relevance of the multiple lipid-independent (pleiotropic) effects of statins in the management of acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46(8):1425–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Kataoka Y, Wolski K, Balog C, Uno K, Puri R, Tuzcu EM, et al. Progression of coronary atherosclerosis in stable patients with ultrasonic features of high-risk plaques. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;15(9):1035–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. •• Lee SE, Chang HJ, Sung JM, Park HB, Heo R, Rizvi A, et al. Effects of statins on coronary atherosclerotic plaques: the PARADIGM study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11(10):1475–84 The PARADIGM study demonstrates a slower progression of overall coronary atherosclerosis volume and a reduction of high-risk plaque features in 2,496 coronary artery lesions from patients on statins as compared with 1,079 coronary artery lesions from statin-naïve patients. This emphasizes the benefit of a statin therapy upon vulnerable plaques.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Baigent C, Blackwell L, Emberson J, Holland LE, Reith C, Bhala N, et al. Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials. Lancet. 2010;376(9753):1670–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Kataoka Y, Puri R, Hammadah M, Duggal B, Uno K, Kapadia SR, et al. Frequency-domain optical coherence tomographic analysis of plaque microstructures at nonculprit narrowings in patients receiving potent statin therapy. Am J Cardiol. 2014;114(4):549–54.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Giugliano RP, Sabatine MS. Are PCSK9 inhibitors the next breakthrough in the cardiovascular field? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65(24):2638–51.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. • Robinson JG, Farnier M, Krempf M, Bergeron J, Luc G, Averna M, et al. Efficacy and safety of alirocumab in reducing lipids and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(16):1489–99 This breakthrough study demonstrated the safety and efficacy of alirocumab in addition to a statin therapy and paved the way for a more efficient therapeutic reduction of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Sabatine MS, Giugliano RP, Keech AC, Honarpour N, Wiviott SD, Murphy SA, et al. Evolocumab and clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(18):1713–22 The Fourier study demonstrated that evolocumab could efficiently lower LDL cholesterol levels and to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. • Lloyd-Jones DM, Morris PB, Ballantyne CM, Birtcher KK, Daly DD Jr, DePalma SM, et al. Focused Update of the 2016 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on the role of non-statin therapies for LDL-cholesterol lowering in the management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Expert Consensus Decision Pathways. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(14):1785–822 Since PCSK9 inhibitors have proven beneficial in cardiovascular outcomes trials in patients with CAD, this focused update of the expert consensus decision pathway on the role of non-statin therapies for LDL cholesterol lowering provides guidance for clinicians on decision making regarding the use of ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Puri R, Nissen SE, Somaratne R, Cho L, Kastelein JJ, Ballantyne CM, et al. Impact of PCSK9 inhibition on coronary atheroma progression: rationale and design of global assessment of plaque regression with a PCSK9 antibody as measured by intravascular ultrasound (GLAGOV). Am Heart J. 2016;176:83–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. •• Nicholls SJ, Puri R, Anderson T, Ballantyne CM, Cho L, Kastelein JJP, et al. Effect of evolocumab on coronary plaque composition. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(17):2012–21 Nicholls et al. investigated in GLAGOV if the addition of evolocumab to a statin would alter the plaque composition, as assessed by IVUS in 968 patients with CAD. Whereas statins have been shown to reduce high-risk plaque features, the addition of evolocumab to a statin did not produce differential changes in plaque composition. However, the addition of evolocumab induced plaque regression in a greater percentage of patients and thus might be a potential therapeutic option for patients harboring vulnerable plaques.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Ridker PM, Cushman M, Stampfer MJ, Tracy RP, Hennekens CH. Inflammation, aspirin, and the risk of cardiovascular disease in apparently healthy men. N Engl J Med. 1997;336(14):973–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Ross R. Atherosclerosis--an inflammatory disease. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(2):115–26.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. • Ridker PM, Everett BM, Thuren T, MacFadyen JG, Chang WH, Ballantyne C, et al. Antiinflammatory therapy with canakinumab for atherosclerotic disease. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(12):1119–31 This randomized, double-blind trial investigates canakinumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β. Only the 150-mg dose, but not the 50- and 300-mg doses, met the threshold for statistical significance for the primary and secondary end points. Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. This study sought to investigate whether non-lipid-lowering targets might be of potential therapeutic benefit for lowering atherosclerotic risk.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. • Ridker PM, Everett BM, Pradhan A, MacFadyen JG, Solomon DH, Zaharris E, et al. Low-dose methotrexate for the prevention of atherosclerotic events. N Engl J Med. 2018;380:752–62. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1809798. In this study, low-dose methotrexate for the prevention of atherosclerotic events failed to reduce cardiovascular events versus placebo. This emphasizes that although lowering inflammation might seen like a logical pathway to decrease risk from vulnerable plaques, the efficacy of such an approach has yet to be shown.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. Patel MR, Calhoon JH, Dehmer GJ, Grantham JA, Maddox TM, Maron DJ, et al. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS 2016 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69(5):570–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CVPath Institute, Inc., 19 Firstfield Road, Gaithersburg, MD, 20878, USA

    Anne Cornelissen, Hiroyuki Jinnouchi, Atsushi Sakamoto, Sho Torii, Salome Kuntz, Liang Guo, Raquel Fernandez, Kay Paek, Christina Mayhew, Matthew Kutyna, Maria E. Romero, Frank D. Kolodgie, Renu Virmani & Aloke V. Finn

  2. Department of Cardiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany

    Anne Cornelissen

  3. Department of Cardiology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Kanagawa, Japan

    Sho Torii

  4. School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Aloke V. Finn

Authors
  1. Anne Cornelissen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hiroyuki Jinnouchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Atsushi Sakamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sho Torii
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Salome Kuntz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Liang Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Raquel Fernandez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Kay Paek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Christina Mayhew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Matthew Kutyna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Maria E. Romero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Frank D. Kolodgie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Renu Virmani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Aloke V. Finn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aloke V. Finn.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

CVPath Institute has received institutional research support from 480 Biomedical, Abbott Vascular, ART, BioSensors International, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Celonova, Claret Medical, Cook Medical, Cordis, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, MicroPort, MicroVention, OrbusNeich, ReCore, SINO Medical Technology, Spectranetics, Surmodics, Terumo Corporation, W.L. Gore and Xeltis. R.V. has received honoraria from 480 Biomedical, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Lutonix, Medtronic, Terumo Corporation and W.L. Gore; and is a consultant for 480 Biomedical, Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, and W.L. Gore. A.V. Finn has received honoraria from Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Amgen, and CeloNova. A.C. receives research grants from University Hospital RWTH Aachen.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Secondary Prevention and Intervention

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cornelissen, A., Jinnouchi, H., Sakamoto, A. et al. Evaluation and Management of the Vulnerable Plaque. Curr Cardiovasc Risk Rep 13, 14 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12170-019-0606-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12170-019-0606-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation