BACKGROUND: Classifying acute coronary syndrome (ACS) as ST elevation ACS (STE-ACS) or non-ST elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS) is critical for clinical prognosis and therapeutic decision-making. Assessing the differences in composition and configuration of culprit lesions between STE-ACS and NSTE-ACS can clarify their pathophysiologic differences. OBJECTIVE: This study focused on evaluating the ability of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) to investigate these differences in culprit lesions in patients with STE-ACS and NSTE-ACS. METHODS: Of 161 ACS cases admitted, 120 who fit study criteria underwent MDCT and conventional coronary angiography. The following MDCT data were analyzed: calcium volume, Agatston calcium scores, plaque area, plaque burden, remodeling index, and plaque density. RESULTS: The MDCT angiography had a good correlation with conventional coronary angiography regarding the stenotic severity of culprit lesions (r=0.86, p<0.001). The STE-ACS culprit lesions (n=54) had significantly higher luminal area stenosis (78.6+/-21.2% vs. 66.7+/-23.9%, p=0.006), larger plaque burden (0.91+/-0.10 vs. 0.84+/-0.12, p=0.007) and remodeling index (1.28+/-0.34 vs. 1.16+/-0.22, p=0.021) than those with NSTE-ACS (n=66). The percentage of expanding remodeling index (remodeling index >1.05) was significantly higher in the STE-ACS group (81.5% vs. 63.6%, p=0.031). The patients with STE-ACS had significantly lower MDCT density of culprit lesions than patients with NSTE-ACS (25.8+/-13.9HU vs. 43.5+/-19.1HU, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Sixty-four-slice MDCT can accurately evaluate the stenotic severity and composition of culprit lesions in selected patients with either STE-ACS or NSTE-ACS. Culprit lesions in NSTE-ACS patients had significantly lower luminal area stenosis, plaque burden, remodeling index and higher MDCT density, which possibly reflect differences in the composition of vulnerable culprit plaques and thrombi. Copyright (c) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Classifying acute coronary syndrome (ACS) as ST elevation ACS (STE-ACS) or non-ST elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS) is critical for clinical prognosis and therapeutic decision-making. Assessing the differences in composition and configuration of culprit lesions between STE-ACS and NSTE-ACS can clarify their pathophysiologic differences. OBJECTIVE: This study focused on evaluating the ability of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) to investigate these differences in culprit lesions in patients with STE-ACS and NSTE-ACS. METHODS: Of 161 ACS cases admitted, 120 who fit study criteria underwent MDCT and conventional coronary angiography. The following MDCT data were analyzed: calcium volume, Agatston calcium scores, plaque area, plaque burden, remodeling index, and plaque density. RESULTS: The MDCT angiography had a good correlation with conventional coronary angiography regarding the stenotic severity of culprit lesions (r=0.86, p<0.001). The STE-ACS culprit lesions (n=54) had significantly higher luminal area stenosis (78.6+/-21.2% vs. 66.7+/-23.9%, p=0.006), larger plaque burden (0.91+/-0.10 vs. 0.84+/-0.12, p=0.007) and remodeling index (1.28+/-0.34 vs. 1.16+/-0.22, p=0.021) than those with NSTE-ACS (n=66). The percentage of expanding remodeling index (remodeling index >1.05) was significantly higher in the STE-ACS group (81.5% vs. 63.6%, p=0.031). The patients with STE-ACS had significantly lower MDCT density of culprit lesions than patients with NSTE-ACS (25.8+/-13.9HU vs. 43.5+/-19.1HU, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Sixty-four-slice MDCT can accurately evaluate the stenotic severity and composition of culprit lesions in selected patients with either STE-ACS or NSTE-ACS. Culprit lesions in NSTE-ACS patients had significantly lower luminal area stenosis, plaque burden, remodeling index and higher MDCT density, which possibly reflect differences in the composition of vulnerable culprit plaques and thrombi. Copyright (c) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Authors: E Maffei; C Martini; C Tedeschi; P Spagnolo; A Zuccarelli; T Arcadi; A Guaricci; S Seitun; A C Weustink; N R Mollet; F Cademartiri Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2011-06-04 Impact factor: 3.469