Utility of Complementary Magnetic Resonance Plaque Imaging and Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound to Detect Carotid Vulnerable Plaques.
Aged
Carotid Stenosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Contrast Media
Endarterectomy, Carotid
Female
Hemorrhage
/ diagnostic imaging
Humans
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Male
Neovascularization, Pathologic
/ diagnostic imaging
Plaque, Atherosclerotic
/ diagnostic imaging
Risk Assessment
Severity of Illness Index
Ultrasonography
carotid artery plaque
carotid magnetic resonance imaging
carotid ultrasound
cerebral infarction
contrast‐enhanced ultrasound
Journal
Journal of the American Heart Association
ISSN: 2047-9980
Titre abrégé: J Am Heart Assoc
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101580524
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 04 2019
16 04 2019
Historique:
entrez:
13
4
2019
pubmed:
13
4
2019
medline:
24
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Background We aimed to improve the assessment quality of plaque vulnerability with combined use of magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound ( CEUS ). Methods and Results We prospectively enrolled 71 patients with internal carotid artery stenosis who underwent carotid endarterectomy and performed preoperative CEUS and magnetic resonance plaque imaging. We distinguished high-signal-intensity plaques ( HIP s) and non- HIP s based on magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition with gradient echo images. We graded them according to the CEUS contrast effect and compared the CEUS images with the carotid endarterectomy specimens. Among the 70 plaques, except 1 carotid endarterectomy tissue sample failure, 59 were classified as HIP s (43 symptomatic) and 11 were classified as non- HIP s (5 symptomatic). Although the magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition with gradient echo findings alone had no significant correlation with symptoms ( P=0.07), concomitant use of magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition with gradient echo and CEUS findings did show a significant correlation ( P<0.0001). CEUS showed that all 5 symptomatic non- HIP s had a high-contrast effect. These 5 plaques were histopathologically confirmed as vulnerable, with extensive neovascularization but only a small amount of intraplaque hemorrhage. Conclusions Complementary use of magnetic resonance imaging and CEUS to detect intraplaque hemorrhage and neovascularization in plaques can be useful for evaluating plaque vulnerability, consistent with the destabilization process associated with neovessel formation and subsequent intraplaque hemorrhage.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30977413
doi: 10.1161/JAHA.118.011302
pmc: PMC6507198
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e011302Références
J Pathol. 1999 Jun;188(2):189-96
pubmed: 10398163
J Neurosurg. 2010 Oct;113(4):890-6
pubmed: 20380530
N Engl J Med. 1998 Nov 12;339(20):1415-25
pubmed: 9811916
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007 Feb;28(2):287-92
pubmed: 17296997
Stroke. 2015 Jan;46(1):182-189
pubmed: 25477221
Ultrasound Med Biol. 2008 May;34(5):824-33
pubmed: 18255220
Neuroradiology. 2012 Nov;54(11):1187-94
pubmed: 22430326
Circulation. 2003 Jun 24;107(24):3047-52
pubmed: 12796133
Circulation. 1995 Sep 1;92(5):1355-74
pubmed: 7648691
Stroke. 2014 Oct;45(10):3073-5
pubmed: 25158775
J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 Apr 16;8(8):e011302
pubmed: 30977413
PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e42472
pubmed: 22860130
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2017 Sep;26(9):1916-1922
pubmed: 28716586
Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2016 Feb;26(1):81-96
pubmed: 26610662
J Vasc Surg. 2015 Jun;61(6):1464-71.e1
pubmed: 25724615