Current Atherosclerosis Reports

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 219–224

Intravascular ultrasound assessment of atherosclerosis

  • Antoine Guédès
  • Jean-Claude Tardif
Article

Abstract

Atherosclerosis imaging has taken on increasing importance in the understanding of the natural history of coronary artery disease and the processes leading to luminal narrowing, as well as the assessment of disease burden and therapy efficacy. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has emerged as the new gold standard for atherosclerosis imaging because it provides cross-sectional images of both the arterial wall and lumen with excellent resolution, reveals the diffuse nature of atherosclerosis and the involvement of reference segments, and takes into account vessel wall remodeling. In addition to its clinical indications, IVUS is now widely used as the primary efficacy assessment measure of several antiatherosclerotic approaches in randomized clinical trials. Advantages of IVUS include its ability to reveal antiatherosclerotic effects within a relatively short period of time and with a reasonable sample size, which is in contrast to trials assessing angiographic changes or clinical events. IVUS can also help to determine dose-response relationships in the development of novel pharmacologic agents. IVUS is currently the ideal imaging modality for clinical trials of atherosclerosis progression/regression.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Berenson GS, Wattigney WA, Tracy RE, et al.: Atherosclerosis of the aorta and coronary arteries and cardiovascular risk factors in persons aged 6 to 30 years and studied at necropsy (The Bogalusa Heart Study). Am J Cardiol 1992, 70:851–858.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tuzcu EM, Kapadia SR, Tutar E, et al.: High prevalence of coronary atherosclerosis in asymptomatic teenagers and young adults: evidence from intravascular ultrasound. Circulation 2001, 103:2705–2710.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tardif JC: The future of intravascular ultrasound in the detection and management of coronary artery disease. Can J Cardiol 2000, 16(suppl D):12D-15D.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tardif JC, Pandian NG: Intravascular ultrasound imaging in peripheral arterial and coronary artery disease. Curr Opin Cardiol 1994, 9:627–633.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tardif JC, Bertrand OF, Mongrain R, et al.: Reliability of mechanical and phased-array designs for serial intravascular ultrasound examinations. Int J Card Imaging 2000, 16:365–375.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schoenhagen P, Sapp SK, Tuczu EM, et al.: Variability of area measurements obtained with different intravascular ultrasound catheter systems: impact on clinical trials and a method for accurate calibration. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2003, 16:277–284.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rioufol G, Finet G, Ginon I, et al.: Multiple atherosclerotic plaque rupture in acute coronary syndrome: a three-vessel intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation 2002, 106:804–808.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kotani J, Mintz GS, Castagna MT, et al.: Intravascular ultrasound analysis of infarct-related and non-infarct-related arteries in patients who presented with an acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2003, 107:2889–2893.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Porter TR, Sears T, Xie F, et al.: Intravascular ultrasound study of angiographically mildly diseased coronary arteries. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993, 22:1858–1865.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mintz GS, Painter JA, Pichard AD, et al.: Atherosclerosis in angiographically “normal” coronary artery reference segments: an intravascular ultrasound study with clinical correlations. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995, 25:1479–1485.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schoenhagen P, Nissen SE, Tuzcu EM: Coronary arterial remodeling: from bench to bedside. Curr Atheroscler Rep 2003, 5:150–154.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cote G, Tardif JC, Lesperance J: Effects of probucol on vascular remodeling after coronary angioplasty. Circulation 1999, 99:30–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weissman NJ, Sheris SJ, Chari R, et al.: Intravascular ultrasonic analysis of plaque characteristics associated with coronary artery remodeling. Am J Cardiol 1999, 84:37–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Glagov S, Weisenberg E, Zarins CK, et al.: Compensatory enlargement of human atherosclerotic coronary arteries. N Engl J Med 1987, 316:1371–1375.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hermiller JB, Tenaglia AN, Kisslo KB, et al.: In vivo validation of compensatory enlargement of atherosclerotic coronary arteries. Am J Cardiol 1993, 71:665–668.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Losordo DW, Rosenfield K, Kaufman J, et al.: Focal compensatory enlargement of human arteries in response to progressive atherosclerosis: in vivo documentation using intravascular ultrasound. Circulation 1994, 89:2570–2577.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gerber TC, Erbel R, Gorge G, et al.: Extent of atherosclerosis and remodeling of the left main coronary artery determined by intravascular ultrasound. Am J Cardiol 1994, 73:666–671.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schoenhagen P, Ziada KM, Kapadia SR, et al.: Extent and direction of arterial remodeling in stable versus unstable coronary syndromes: an intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation 2000, 101:598–603.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lerman A, Cannan CR, Higano SH, et al.: Coronary vascular remodeling in association with endothelial dysfunction. Am J Cardiol 1998, 81:1105–1109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mintz GS, Kent KM, Pichard AD, et al.: Contribution of inadequate arterial remodeling to the development of focal coronary artery stenoses. An intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation 1997, 95:1791–1798.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pasterkamp G, Wensing PJ, Post MJ, et al.: Paradoxical arterial wall shrinkage may contribute to luminal narrowing of human atherosclerotic femoral arteries. Circulation 1995, 91:1444–1449.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pande AK, Tardif JC, Doucet S, et al.: Intravascular ultrasound for diagnosis of left main coronary artery stenosis. Can J Cardiol 1996, 12:757–759.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Abizaid AS, Mintz GS, Abizaid A, et al.: One-year follow-up after intravascular ultrasound assessment of moderate left main coronary artery disease in patients with ambiguous angiograms. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999, 34:707–715.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mintz GS, Nissen SE, Anderson WD, et al.: ACC clinical experts consensus document on standards for acquisition, measurement and reporting of intravascular ultrasound studies (IVUS). J Am Coll Cardiol 2001, 37:1478–1492.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nishioka T, Amanullah AM, Luo H, et al.: Clinical validation of intravascular ultrasound imaging for assessment of coronary stenosis severity. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999, 33:1870–1878.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wiedermann JG, Schwartz A, Apfelbaum M: Anatomic and physiologic heterogeneity in patients with syndrome X: an intravascular ultrasound study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995, 25:1310–1317.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bourassa MG, Butnaru A, Lesperance J, Tardif JC: Symptomatic myocardial bridges: overview of ischemic mechanisms and current diagnostic and treatment strategies. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003, 41:351–359.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yamagishi M, Miyatake K, Tamai J, et al.: Intravascular ultrasound detection of atherosclerosis at the site of focal vasospasm in angiographically normal or minimally narrowed coronary segments. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994, 23:352–357.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hong MK, Park SW, Lee CW, et al.: Intravascular ultrasound findings of negative arterial remodeling at sites of focal coronary spasm in patients with vasospastic angina. Am Heart J 2000, 140:395–401.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Meerkin D, Tardif JC, Bertrand OF, et al.: The effects of intracoronary brachytherapy on the natural history of postangioplasty dissections. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000, 36:59–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Malekianpour M, Rodes J, Tardif JC: Value of exercise electrocardiography in the detection of restenosis after coronary angioplasty in patients with one-vessel disease. Am J Cardiol 1999, 84:258–263.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    St Goar FG, Pinto FJ, Alderman EL, et al.: Intracoronary ultrasound in cardiac transplant recipients. In vivo evidence of “angiographically silent” intimal thickening. Circulation 1992, 85:979–987.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tuzcu EM, De Franco AC, Goormastic M, et al.: Dichotomous pattern of coronary atherosclerosis 1 to 9 years after transplantation: insights from systematic intravascular ultrasound imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996, 27:839–846.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pinto FJ, Chenzbraun A, Botas J, et al.: Feasibility of serial intracoronary ultrasound imaging for assessment of progression of intimal proliferation in cardiac transplant recipients. Circulation 1994, 90:2348–2355.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rickenbacher PR, Pinto FJ, Lewis NP: Prognostic importance of intimal thickness as measured by intracoronary ultrasound after cardiac transplantation. Circulation 1995, 92:3445–3452.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mehra MR, Ventura HO, Stapleton DD, et al.: Presence of severe intimal thickening by intravascular ultrasonography predicts cardiac events in cardiac allograft vasculopathy. J Heart Lung Transplant 1995, 14:632–639.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Eisen HJ, Tuczu EM, Dorent R, et al.: Everolimus for the prevention of allograft rejection and vasculopathy in cardiactransplant recipients. N Engl J Med 2003, 349:847–858.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tuzcu EM, Hobbs RE, Rincon G, et al.: Occult and frequent transmission of atherosclerotic coronary disease with cardiac transplantation. Insights from intravascular ultrasound. Circulation 1995, 91:1706–1713.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schartl M, Bocksch W, Koschyk DH, et al.: Use of intravascular ultrasound to compare effects of different strategies of lipid-lowering therapy on plaque volume and composition in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation 2001, 104:387–392.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Takagi T, Yoshida K, Akasaka T, et al.: Intravascular ultrasound analysis of reduction in progression of coronary narrowing by treatment with pravastatin. Am J Cardiol 1997, 79:1673–1676.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ishikawa K, Tani S, Watanabe I, et al.: Effect of pravastatin on coronary plaque volume. Am J Cardiol 2003, 92:975–977.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tardif JC, Gregoire J, L’Allier PL, Joyal M: Chronic heart rate reduction with ivabradine and prevention of atherosclerosis progression assessed by intravascular ultrasound. Eur Heart J 2003, 5(suppl G):G46-G51.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Waters D, Craven TE, Lesperance J: Prognostic significance of progression of coronary atherosclerosis. Circulation 1993, 87:1067–1075.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nissen SE: Rationale for a postintervention continuum of care: Insights from intravascular ultrasound. Am J Cardiol 2000, 86(suppl):12H-17H.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Nissen SE, Tsunoda T, Tuzcu M, et al.: Effect of recombinant ApoA-I Milano on coronary atherosclerosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes. JAMA 2003, 290:2292–2300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Tardif JC, Gregoire J, Lesperance J, et al.: Design features of the Avasimibe and Progression of coronary Lesions assessed by intravascular UltraSound (A-PLUS) clinical trial. Am Heart J 2002, 144:589–596.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Barter PJ, Brewer B Jr, Chapman J, et al.: Cholesteryl ester transfer protein. A novel target for raising HDL and inhibiting atherosclerosis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2003, 23:160–167.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tardif JC: Clinical results with AGI-1067: a novel antioxidant vascular protectant. Am J Cardiol 2003, 91(suppl):41A-49A.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Tardif JC, Gregoire J, Schwartz L, et al.: Effects of AGI-1067 and probucol after percutaneous coronary interventions. Circulation 2003, 107:552–558.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hausmann D, Erbel R, Alibelli-Chemarin MJ, et al.: The safety of intracoronary ultrasound. A multicenter survey of 2207 examinations. Circulation 1995, 91:623–630.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Batkoff BW, Linker DT: Safety of intracoronary ultrasound: data from a multicenter european registry. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1996, 38:238–241.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pinto FJ, St Goar FG, Gao SZ, et al.: Immediate and one-year safety of intracoronary ultrasonic imaging. Evaluation with serial quantitative angiography. Circulation 1993, 88:1709–1714.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ramasubbu K, Schoenhagen P, Balgith MA, et al.: Repeated intravascular ultrasound imaging in cardiac transplant recipients does not accelerate transplant coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003, 41:1739–1743.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antoine Guédès
    • 1
  • Jean-Claude Tardif
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MedicineMontreal Heart InstituteMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations