Andreas A Giannopoulos1, Yiannis S Chatzizisis2, Pal Maurovich-Horvat3, Antonios P Antoniadis4, Udo Hoffmann5, Michael L Steigner1, Frank J Rybicki6, Dimitrios Mitsouras7. 1. Applied Imaging Science Laboratory, Radiology Department, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Cardiovascular Division, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA. 3. MTA-SE Lendület Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. 4. Cardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Cardiovascular Department, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 5. Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Applied Imaging Science Laboratory, Radiology Department, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Radiology, The Ottawa Hospital, The University of Ottawa, Ontario, ON, Canada. 7. Applied Imaging Science Laboratory, Radiology Department, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: dmitsouras@partners.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Low and high endothelial shear stress (ESS) is associated with coronary atherosclerosis progression and high-risk plaque features. Coronary ESS is currently assessed via computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulation of coronary blood flow in the lumen geometry determined from invasive imaging such as intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography. This process typically omits side branches of the target vessel in the CFD model as invasive imaging of those vessels is not usually clinically-indicated. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which this simplification affects the determination of those regions of the coronary endothelium subjected to pathologic ESS. METHODS: We determined the diagnostic accuracy of ESS profiling without side branches to detect pathologic ESS in the major coronary arteries of 5 hearts imaged ex vivo with computed tomography angiography (CTA). ESS of the three major coronary arteries was calculated both without (test model), and with (reference model) inclusion of all side branches >1.5 mm in diameter, using previously-validated CFD approaches. Diagnostic test characteristics (accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and negative and positive predictive value [NPV/PPV]) with respect to the reference model were assessed for both the entire length as well as only the proximal portion of each major coronary artery, where the majority of high-risk plaques occur. RESULTS: Using the model without side branches overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV were 83.4%, 54.0%, 96%, 95.9% and 55.1%, respectively to detect low ESS, and 87.0%, 67.7%, 90.7%, 93.7% and 57.5%, respectively to detect high ESS. When considering only the proximal arteries, test characteristics differed for low and high ESS, with low sensitivity (67.7%) and high specificity (90.7%) to detect low ESS, and low sensitivity (44.7%) and high specificity (95.5%) to detect high ESS. CONCLUSIONS: The exclusion of side branches in ESS vascular profiling studies greatly reduces the ability to detect regions of the major coronary arteries subjected to pathologic ESS. Single-conduit models can in general only be used to rule out pathologic ESS.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Low and high endothelial shear stress (ESS) is associated with coronary atherosclerosis progression and high-risk plaque features. Coronary ESS is currently assessed via computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulation of coronary blood flow in the lumen geometry determined from invasive imaging such as intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography. This process typically omits side branches of the target vessel in the CFD model as invasive imaging of those vessels is not usually clinically-indicated. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which this simplification affects the determination of those regions of the coronary endothelium subjected to pathologic ESS. METHODS: We determined the diagnostic accuracy of ESS profiling without side branches to detect pathologic ESS in the major coronary arteries of 5 hearts imaged ex vivo with computed tomography angiography (CTA). ESS of the three major coronary arteries was calculated both without (test model), and with (reference model) inclusion of all side branches >1.5 mm in diameter, using previously-validated CFD approaches. Diagnostic test characteristics (accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and negative and positive predictive value [NPV/PPV]) with respect to the reference model were assessed for both the entire length as well as only the proximal portion of each major coronary artery, where the majority of high-risk plaques occur. RESULTS: Using the model without side branches overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV were 83.4%, 54.0%, 96%, 95.9% and 55.1%, respectively to detect low ESS, and 87.0%, 67.7%, 90.7%, 93.7% and 57.5%, respectively to detect high ESS. When considering only the proximal arteries, test characteristics differed for low and high ESS, with low sensitivity (67.7%) and high specificity (90.7%) to detect low ESS, and low sensitivity (44.7%) and high specificity (95.5%) to detect high ESS. CONCLUSIONS: The exclusion of side branches in ESS vascular profiling studies greatly reduces the ability to detect regions of the major coronary arteries subjected to pathologic ESS. Single-conduit models can in general only be used to rule out pathologic ESS.
Authors: Yiannis S Chatzizisis; Aaron B Baker; Galina K Sukhova; Konstantinos C Koskinas; Michail I Papafaklis; Roy Beigel; Michael Jonas; Ahmet U Coskun; Benjamin V Stone; Charles Maynard; Guo-Ping Shi; Peter Libby; Charles L Feldman; Elazer R Edelman; Peter H Stone Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-01-31 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Frank J H Gijsen; Johan C H Schuurbiers; Alina G van de Giessen; Michiel Schaap; Anton F W van der Steen; Jolanda J Wentzel Journal: J Biomech Date: 2013-10-22 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: Rocco Vergallo; Michail I Papafaklis; Taishi Yonetsu; Christos V Bourantas; Ioannis Andreou; Zhao Wang; James G Fujimoto; Iris McNulty; Hang Lee; Luigi M Biasucci; Filippo Crea; Charles L Feldman; Lampros K Michalis; Peter H Stone; Ik-Kyung Jang Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-09-04 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Michail I Papafaklis; Christos V Bourantas; Taishi Yonetsu; Rocco Vergallo; Anna Kotsia; Shimpei Nakatani; Lampros S Lakkas; Lambros S Athanasiou; Katerina K Naka; Dimitrios I Fotiadis; Charles L Feldman; Peter H Stone; Patrick W Serruys; Ik-Kyung Jang; Lampros K Michalis Journal: EuroIntervention Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 6.534
Authors: Kazuyuki Yahagi; Frank D Kolodgie; Fumiyuki Otsuka; Aloke V Finn; Harry R Davis; Michael Joner; Renu Virmani Journal: Nat Rev Cardiol Date: 2015-10-27 Impact factor: 32.419
Authors: Konstantinos C Koskinas; Galina K Sukhova; Aaron B Baker; Michail I Papafaklis; Yiannis S Chatzizisis; Ahmet U Coskun; Thibaut Quillard; Michael Jonas; Charles Maynard; Antonios P Antoniadis; Guo-Ping Shi; Peter Libby; Elazer R Edelman; Charles L Feldman; Peter H Stone Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2013-05-02 Impact factor: 8.311
Authors: Yiannis S Chatzizisis; Michael Jonas; Ahmet U Coskun; Roy Beigel; Benjamin V Stone; Charles Maynard; Ross G Gerrity; William Daley; Campbell Rogers; Elazer R Edelman; Charles L Feldman; Peter H Stone Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-02-04 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Parham Eshtehardi; Michael C McDaniel; Jin Suo; Saurabh S Dhawan; Lucas H Timmins; José Nilo G Binongo; Lucas J Golub; Michel T Corban; Aloke V Finn; John N Oshinski; Arshed A Quyyumi; Don P Giddens; Habib Samady Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2012-08-24 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Andreas A Giannopoulos; Dimitrios Mitsouras; Andrea Bartykowszki; Béla Merkely; Yiannis S Chatzizisis; Ronny R Buechel; Philipp A Kaufmann; Oliver Gaemperli; Pál Maurovich-Horvat Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Madhurima Vardhan; John Gounley; S James Chen; Andrew M Kahn; Jane A Leopold; Amanda Randles Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Satoru Kishi; Andreas A Giannopoulos; Anji Tang; Nahoko Kato; Yiannis S Chatzizisis; Carole Dennie; Yu Horiuchi; Kengo Tanabe; João A C Lima; Frank J Rybicki; Dimitris Mitsouras Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-11-20 Impact factor: 29.146
Authors: Yakup Kilic; Hannah Safi; Retesh Bajaj; Patrick W Serruys; Pieter Kitslaar; Anantharaman Ramasamy; Vincenzo Tufaro; Yoshinobu Onuma; Anthony Mathur; Ryo Torii; Andreas Baumbach; Christos V Bourantas Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2020-03-31