4.7 Article

The definition of low wall shear stress and its effect on plaque progression estimation in human coronary arteries

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-01232-3

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Wall shear stress (WSS) plays a crucial role in atherosclerotic plaque development, with low WSS being associated with plaque growth. Previous research used different approaches to define low WSS and investigate its effect on plaque progression. This study used multiple methodologies to allocate low, mid, and high WSS in human coronary arteries, revealing challenges in using absolute thresholds to determine regions at high risk for plaque progression.
Wall shear stress (WSS), the frictional force of the blood on the vessel wall, plays a crucial role in atherosclerotic plaque development. Low WSS has been associated with plaque growth, however previous research used different approaches to define low WSS to investigate its effect on plaque progression. In this study, we used four methodologies to allocate low, mid and high WSS in one dataset of human coronary arteries and investigated the predictive power of low WSS for plaque progression. Coronary reconstructions were based on multimodality imaging, using intravascular ultrasound and CT-imaging. Vessel-specific flow was measured using Doppler wire and computational fluid dynamics was performed to calculate WSS. The absolute WSS range varied greatly between the coronary arteries. On the population level, the established pattern of most plaque progression at low WSS was apparent in all methodologies defining the WSS categories. However, for the individual patient, when using measured flow to determine WSS, the absolute WSS values range so widely, that the use of absolute thresholds to determine low WSS was not appropriate to identify regions at high risk for plaque progression.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available