| Literature DB >> 31754864 |
Haitham Galal1, Tarek Rashid2, Wesam Alghonaimy2, Diaa Kamal2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Positive arterial remodeling may be a characteristic of early proliferative lesions. The study was done to identify the different morphological characteristics of the positively remodeled coronary lesions, and causing non-significant arterial stenosis, as detected by multislice computed tomography coronary angiography (MSCT CA) and its predictors of cardiovascular clinical events at 90-day follow-up. The study included 55 patients who were candidate for MSCT CA and found to have a single-vessel disease with less than 70% stenosis positively remodeled lesions. The most expansive or solitary lesion was selected for each patient. Positive remodeling defined as remodeling index (RI) > 1.05. We followed the patients clinically for 90 days.Entities:
Keywords: CA remodeling; MSCT CA
Year: 2019 PMID: 31754864 PMCID: PMC6872684 DOI: 10.1186/s43044-019-0029-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Egypt Heart J ISSN: 1110-2608
Patient demographic data, risk factors, and clinical presentation
| No. = 55 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 55.62 ± 7.78 | |
| Males | 39 (70.9%) | |
| BMI | 28.25 ± 2.94 | |
| Smokers | 29 (52.7%) | |
| Hypertensive | 31 (56.4%) | |
| Diabetics | 29 (52.7%) | |
| DM type | DM type I | 4 (14.3% |
| DM type II | 24 (85.7%) | |
| Duration of DM (years) | 14.39 ± 5.20 | |
| Dyslipidemic | 37 (67.3%) | |
| Family history | 10 (18.2%) | |
| Initial presentation | ACS | 24 (43.6%) |
| Atypical chest pain | 14 (25.5%) | |
| Dyspnea | 9 (16.4%) | |
| Stable angina | 8 (14.5%) | |
| EF (%) | 59.33 ± 5.62 | |
BMI body mass index, DM diabetes mellitus, EF ejection fraction, ACS acute coronary syndrome
CT measurements at both reference and remodeling segments
| Variable | Reference segment | Remodeling segment | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Area (mm2) | Vessel | 18.93 ± 6.98 | 26.49 ± 10.63 |
| Wall | 8.40 ± 3.37 | 17.49 ± 6.92 | |
| Total plaque | 8.44 ± 3.28 | 17.22 ± 6.64 | |
| Low-attenuation plaque | 5.00 (4–6) | ||
| Medium attenuation plaque | 8.00 (6–10) 3–21 | ||
| High-attenuation plaque | 2 (1–5) 0–13 | ||
| Percentage (%) | Wall/lumen area | 82.85 ± 19.00 | 222.82 ± 98.19 |
| Plaque burden | 44.67 ± 5.84 | 66.80 ± 8.29 | |
| Low-attenuation plaque area | 29.76 ± 9.59 | 32.73 ± 11.04 | |
| Medium attenuation plaque area | 62.76 ± 9.24 | 50.04 ± 14.53 | |
| High-attenuation plaque area | 9 (5–24) 0–62 | ||
| Mean density (HU) | Low-attenuation plaque | 6 (0–16) − 21–21 | |
| Medium attenuation plaque | 92.04 ± 9.79 | 94.18 ± 7.05 | |
| High-attenuation plaque | 185 (162–230) 0–630 | ||
| Calcium score (Agatston method) | Plaque-specific | 0 (0–0) 0–91 | |
| Total CA score | 0 (0–0) 0–850 |
HU Hounsfield unit
Relation between different cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular events
| No events | events | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. = 30 | No. = 25 | |||
| Age (years) | 55.17 ± 7.91 | 56.16 ± 7.74 | 0.642 | |
| Males | 20 (66.7%) | 19 (76.0%) | 0.448 | |
| BMI | 27.77 ± 2.93 | 28.84 ± 2.90 | 0.180 | |
| Smoking | Nonsmoker | 0.657 | ||
| Smoker | 15 (50.0%) | 14 (56.0%) | ||
| Hypertensive | 16 (53.3%) | 15 (60.0%) | 0.620 | |
| Diabetics | 15 (50.0%) | 14 (56.0%) | 0.657 | |
| DM type | DM type I | 2 (13.3%) | 2 (15.4%) | 0.877 |
| DM type II | 13 (86.7%) | 11 (84.6%) | ||
| Duration of DM | ||||
| Dyslipidemia | 19 (63.3%) | 18 (72.0%) | 0.495 | |
| EF (%) | 60.50 ± 5.73 | 57.92 ± 5.25 | 0.090 | |
BMI body mass index, DM diabetes mellitus, EF ejection fraction
*Significant P value
Fig. 1Stenosis grading in relation to clinical events
Relation between different CT vessel measurement and plaque characterization with future cardiovascular clinical events
| Variable at remodeling site | No clinical events | Clinical events | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Area (mm2) | Vessel | 25.30 ± 10.68 | 27.92 ± 10.60 | 0.368 |
| Wall | 16.27 ± 7.11 | 18.96 ± 6.51 | 0.152 | |
| Total plaque | 15.93 ± 6.65 | 18.76 ± 6.42 | 0.117 | |
| Low-attenuation plaque | Median 5 (4–6) 2–10 | 5 (4–6) 2–9 | 0.421 | |
| Medium attenuation plaque | Median 7 (6–10) 3–15 | 8 (7–10) 4–21 | 0.288 | |
| High-attenuation plaque | Median 1 (0–2) 0–13 | 2 (1–6) 0–12 | ||
| Percentage (%) | Wall/lumen area | 188.73 ± 53.34 | 263.72 ± 122.71 | |
| Plaque burden | 64.37 ± 6.03 | 69.72 ± 9.71 | ||
| Low-attenuation plaque area | 36.60 ± 10.64 | 28.08 ± 9.81 | ||
| Medium attenuation plaque area | 50.87 ± 13.02 | 49.04 ± 16.38 | 0.647 | |
| High-attenuation plaque area | Median 9 (1–11 0–37 | 9 (6–41) 0–62 | 0.117 | |
| Mean density (HU) | Low attenuation | Median 6 (1–14) − 21.00–20 | 6 (0–16) − 19.00–21 | 0.806 |
| Medium attenuation | 93.23 ± 7.32 | 95.32 ± 6.67 | 0.278 | |
| High attenuation | Median 170 (162–208) 0–428 | 196 (166–381) 0–630 | 0.106 | |
| Calcium score (Agatston method) | Plaque-specific | Median 0 (0–0) 0–18 | 0 (0–62) 0–91 | |
| Total calcium score | Median 0 (0–0) 0–48 | 0 (0–260) 0–850 | ||
| Remodeling index | 1.39 ± 0.21 | 1.44 ± 0.30 | 0.479 | |
HU Hounsfield unit
*Significant P value, **Highly significant P value
Fig. 2ROC curve showing cut-off value for the wall lumen area percentage and plaque burden percentage