AN EXPLANATION FOR DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ANGIOGRAPHIC AND INTRAVASCULARULTRASOUND MEASUREMENTS AFTER PERCUTANEOUS TRANSLUMINAL CORONARY ANGIOPLASTY

Citation
S. Nakamura et al., AN EXPLANATION FOR DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ANGIOGRAPHIC AND INTRAVASCULARULTRASOUND MEASUREMENTS AFTER PERCUTANEOUS TRANSLUMINAL CORONARY ANGIOPLASTY, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 25(3), 1995, pp. 633-639
Citations number
27
Categorie Soggetti
Cardiac & Cardiovascular System
ISSN journal
07351097
Volume
25
Issue
3
Year of publication
1995
Pages
633 - 639
Database
ISI
SICI code
0735-1097(1995)25:3<633:AEFDBA>2.0.ZU;2-H
Abstract
Objectives. This study attempted to determine why there is a discrepan cy between angiographic and intravascular ultrasound measurements afte r coronary balloon angioplasty. Background. Previous studies have show n a poor correlation between angiographic and intravascular ultrasound measurements after percutaneous coronary balloon angioplasty. Methods . After successful balloon angioplasty, 91 lesions in 84 patients were studied by intravascular ultrasound. Plaque morphology on intravascul ar ultrasound was classified as demonstrating a superficial injury if there was either no fracture or only a small tear that did not extend to the media versus a deep injury defined as the presence of a plaque fracture that reached the media. Measurements of minimal lumen diamete r were compared between angiography and intravascular ultrasound. Resu lts. On ultrasound imaging, a superficial injury pattern was observed in 44 lesions, whereas a deep injury was seen in 47 lesions. There wer e no statistical differences at baseline in patient or lesion characte ristics. In the superficial injury group there was a significant corre lation between angiography and intravascular ultrasound for minimal lu men diameter (r = 0.67) and lumen cross-sectional area (r = 0.69). In the deep injury group there was a poor correlation for minimal lumen d iameter (r = 0.05) and lumen cross-sectional area (r = 0.28). After ba lloon angioplasty, the angiographic appearance showed a normal contour in 34%, the presence of dissection in 38% or a hazy appearance in 23% . On ultrasound imaging after angioplasty, the superficial injury grou p comprised 65% of lesions with a normal angiographic appearance and 6 7% of lesions with a hazy appearance, whereas 77% of lesions with an a ngiographic diagnosis of dissection were in the deep injury group by u ltrasound (p = 0.0005). Conclusions. These observations suggest that t he discrepancies between angiographic and ultrasound measurements are due to differences in plaque morphology created by balloon dilation. S uperficial injuries demonstrate similar results by angiography or ultr asound, whereas a deep injury to the plaque produces a difference in m easurements between angiography and ultrasound. When angiography revea ls a dissection, there is a high probability that intravascular ultras ound will demonstrate a plaque fracture extending to the media.