BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Surface disruption, either ulceration or fibrous cap rupture, has been identified as a key feature of the unstable atherosclerotic plaque. In this prospective observational study, we sought to determine the characteristics of the carotid lesion that predict the development of new surface disruption. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred eight asymptomatic individuals with 50%-79% carotid stenosis underwent carotid MR imaging at baseline and at 3 years. Multicontrast imaging criteria were used to determine the presence or absence of calcification, LRNC, intraplaque hemorrhage, and surface disruption. Volume measurements of plaque morphology and the LRNC and calcification, when present, were collected. RESULTS: At baseline, 21.3% (23/108) of participants were identified with a surface disruption. After 3 years, 9 (10.6%) of the remaining 85 individuals without disruption at baseline developed a new surface disruption during follow-up. Among all baseline variables associated with new surface disruption during regression analysis, the proportion of wall volume occupied by the LRNC (percentage LRNC volume; OR per 5% increase, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.6) was the strongest classifier (AUC = 0.95) during ROC analysis. New surface disruption was associated with a significant increase in percentage LRNC volume (1.7 +/- 2.0% per year, P = .035). CONCLUSIONS: This prospective investigation of asymptomatic individuals with 50%-79% stenosis provides compelling evidence that LRNC size may govern the risk of future surface disruption. Identification of carotid plaques in danger of developing new surface disruption may prove clinically valuable for preventing the transition from stable to unstable atherosclerotic disease.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Surface disruption, either ulceration or fibrous cap rupture, has been identified as a key feature of the unstable atherosclerotic plaque. In this prospective observational study, we sought to determine the characteristics of the carotid lesion that predict the development of new surface disruption. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred eight asymptomatic individuals with 50%-79% carotid stenosis underwent carotid MR imaging at baseline and at 3 years. Multicontrast imaging criteria were used to determine the presence or absence of calcification, LRNC, intraplaque hemorrhage, and surface disruption. Volume measurements of plaque morphology and the LRNC and calcification, when present, were collected. RESULTS: At baseline, 21.3% (23/108) of participants were identified with a surface disruption. After 3 years, 9 (10.6%) of the remaining 85 individuals without disruption at baseline developed a new surface disruption during follow-up. Among all baseline variables associated with new surface disruption during regression analysis, the proportion of wall volume occupied by the LRNC (percentage LRNC volume; OR per 5% increase, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.6) was the strongest classifier (AUC = 0.95) during ROC analysis. New surface disruption was associated with a significant increase in percentage LRNC volume (1.7 +/- 2.0% per year, P = .035). CONCLUSIONS: This prospective investigation of asymptomatic individuals with 50%-79% stenosis provides compelling evidence that LRNC size may govern the risk of future surface disruption. Identification of carotid plaques in danger of developing new surface disruption may prove clinically valuable for preventing the transition from stable to unstable atherosclerotic disease.
Authors: Chun Yuan; Shao-xiong Zhang; Nayak L Polissar; Denise Echelard; Geraldo Ortiz; Joseph W Davis; Elizabeth Ellington; Marina S Ferguson; Thomas S Hatsukami Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-01-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Rachael E Murphy; Alan R Moody; Paul S Morgan; Anne L Martel; G S Delay; Steve Allder; Shane T MacSweeney; William G Tennant; John Gladman; John Lowe; Beverley J Hunt Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-06-09 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: W T Longstreth; Corinne Dulberg; Teri A Manolio; Michael R Lewis; Norman J Beauchamp; Daniel O'Leary; Jeff Carr; Curt D Furberg Journal: Stroke Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Steven E Nissen; E Murat Tuzcu; Paul Schoenhagen; B Greg Brown; Peter Ganz; Robert A Vogel; Tim Crowe; Gail Howard; Christopher J Cooper; Bruce Brodie; Cindy L Grines; Anthony N DeMaria Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-03-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Baocheng Chu; Annette Kampschulte; Marina S Ferguson; William S Kerwin; Vasily L Yarnykh; Kevin D O'Brien; Nayak L Polissar; Thomas S Hatsukami; Chun Yuan Journal: Stroke Date: 2004-04-01 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Lee M Mitsumori; Thomas S Hatsukami; Marina S Ferguson; William S Kerwin; Jianming Cai; Chun Yuan Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Li Dong; Jinnan Wang; Vasily L Yarnykh; Hunter R Underhill; Moni B Neradilek; Nayak Polissar; Thomas S Hatsukami; Chun Yuan Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Yuan-Yuan Cui; Xiao-Yi Chen; Lu Ma; Ming-Ming Lu; Guo-En Yao; Jia-Fei Yang; Xi-Hai Zhao; Jian-Ming Cai Journal: Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao Date: 2016-04-20
Authors: Dongxiang Xu; Daniel S Hippe; Hunter R Underhill; Minako Oikawa-Wakayama; Li Dong; Kiyofumi Yamada; Chun Yuan; Thomas S Hatsukami Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-03-13
Authors: Jie Sun; Xue-Qiao Zhao; Niranjan Balu; Moni B Neradilek; Daniel A Isquith; Kiyofumi Yamada; Gádor Cantón; John R Crouse; Todd J Anderson; John Huston; Kevin O'Brien; Daniel S Hippe; Nayak L Polissar; Chun Yuan; Thomas S Hatsukami Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-03
Authors: A C van Dijk; M T B Truijman; B Hussain; T Zadi; G Saiedie; A A J de Rotte; M I Liem; A F W van der Steen; M J A P Daemen; P J Koudstaal; P J Nederkoorn; J Hendrikse; M E Kooi; A van der Lugt Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 3.825