4.7 Article

Quantification of plaque neovascularization using contrast ultrasound: a histologic validation

期刊

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
卷 32, 期 5, 页码 646-653

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq197

关键词

Atherosclerosis; Plaque; Ultrasonics; Contrast media; Angiogenesis

资金

  1. American Society of Echocardiography
  2. National Institutes of Health [RO1HL077534]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims The density of vasa vasorum within atherosclerotic plaque correlates with histologic features of plaque vulnerability in post-mortem studies. Imaging methods to non-invasively detect vasa vasorum are limited. We hypothesized that contrast ultrasound (CUS) can quantify vasa vasorum during atherosclerosis progression. Methods and results New Zealand white rabbits received a high-fat diet for 3 weeks, and bilateral femoral artery stenosis was induced by balloon injury. Contrast ultrasound femoral imaging was performed at baseline and 2, 4, and 6 weeks post injury to quantify adventitial videointensity. At each imaging time point 10 vessels were sectioned and stained with haematoxylin and eosin and von-Willebrand factor. Adventitial vasa vasorum density was quantified by counting the number of stained microvessels and their total cross-sectional area. Plaque size (per cent lumen area) progressed over time (P < 0.001), as did adventitial vasa vasorum density (P < 0.001). Plateau peak videointensity also progressed, demonstrating a strong linear correlation with histologic vasa vasorum density (P < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated that a three-fold increase in median adventitial videointensity had a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 88% for predicting abnormal neovascularization. Conclusion We have histologically validated that CUS quantifies the development of adventitial vasa vasorum associated with atherosclerosis progression. This imaging technique has the potential for characterizing prognostically significant plaque features.

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