4.7 Article

Intravascular Optical Coherence Tomography Detection of Atherosclerosis and Inflammation in Murine Aorta

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.111.243626

关键词

atherosclerosis; macrophages; optical coherence tomography

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [HL85816, HL57506 MERIT]
  2. University Hospitals Harrington-McLaughlin Heart and Vascular Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective-The goal of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of imaging the aorta of apolipoprotein E-deficient (ApoE(-/-)) mice for the detection of atherosclerosis and macrophages using optical coherence tomography (OCT) compared with histology. Methods and Results-Atherosclerosis was induced by high-fat diet in 7-week-old ApoE(-/-) mice for 10 (n=7) and 22 (n=7) weeks. Nine-week-old ApoE(-/-) mice (n=7) fed a standard chow diet were used as controls. OCT images of a 10-mm descending aorta in situ were performed in 4 mice for each, and plaque and macrophages were determined at 0.5-mm intervals. Automated detection and quantification of macrophages were performed independently using a customized algorithm. Coregistered histological cross-sections were stained with hematoxylin-eosin, Mac-3, and von Kossa. Three mice in each group had en face OCT imaging to detect macrophages, which were compared with lipid-positive area with Sudan IV. OCT images were successfully acquired in all mice. OCT and histology were able to discriminate macrophages and plaque among the 3 groups and showed excellent correlation for (1) visual detection of plaque (r=0.98) and macrophages (r=0.93), (2) automated detection and quantification of macrophages by OCT versus Mac-3-positive area (r=0.92), and (3) en face OCT detection of macrophages versus Sudan IV-positive area (r=0.92). Conclusion-Murine intra-aortic OCT is feasible and shows excellent correlation with histology for detection of atherosclerotic plaque and macrophages. (Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2012; 32: 1150-1157.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据