Journal List > Korean Circ J > v.49(11) > 1135427

See the article "".
Heo: Glimpse of Relation between Imaging and Physiology
Coronary angiography remains the basic imaging modality to define the degree and extent of coronary atherosclerosis in clinical practice during diagnostic and therapeutic coronary intervention. However, the limitation of angiography is still frequently seen and is affected by technical limitations, operator versatility, and its poor visualization of the vessel wall. Furthermore, it provides limited information about the functional significance of the lesion. Today, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), fractional flow reserve (FFR), and optical coherence tomography (OCT) are extensively used to overcome these limitations of conventional coronary angiography.
Near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) is routinely used to characterize chemical composition of biological tissue. The ability of NIRS to discriminate lipid-rich atherosclerotic plaque with high sensitivity and specificity in vitro provided the possibility that NIRS could be used to detect lipid-rich atheromas in vivo. The major limitation of NIRS is that it provides compositional, but not structural, information.1) These limitations can be overcome with combination with grey-scale IVUS.2) Several parameters have been introduced for the quantification of lipid presence in the scanned region. Among them, the lipid-core burden index (LCBI) defined as the fraction of yellow pixels on the chemogram multiplied by 1,000 is the essential parameter of NIRS which reflects lipid component and plaque vulnerability, and in this report LCBI is the main parameter of the NIRS.
Coronary microvascular dysfunction has been associated with angina and increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, including acute coronary syndrome, myocardial infarction, progressive congestive heart failure, and sudden cardiac death.3)4)5) Coronary microvascular resistance is increasingly measured as a predictor of clinical outcomes, but there is no accepted gold-standard measurement. Among them, the recently introduced index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) has been validated as a measure of microvascular resistance.6) IMR has been shown to be independent of the presence of varying extents of coronary stenosis in a porcine model and humans, and it is also independent of FFR.7)
In this issue of Korean Circulation Journal, Yang and colleagues8) showed that post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) IMR was higher (15.6±7.3 vs. 42.6±17.6 U, p<0.001) and post-PCI coronary flow reserve (CFR) was lower (3.7±2.2 vs. 2.1±1.0, p=0.029) in the high LCBI group. They also showed Pre-PCI LCBI was positively correlated with post-PCI IMR (ρ=0.358, p=0.025) and negatively correlated with post-PCI CFR (ρ=−0.494, p=0.001). This report may be the first published data about the relation between imaging (NIRS focused) and physiology parameters of coronary microvascular dysfunction. Even though the relation is not so strong enough to produce clinical parameters differences such as cardiac enzyme or adverse cardio-vascular outcome, this report showed some glimpse of relation between lipid core plaque by NIRS and microvascular abnormality.
Historically, there are many reports about the relationship between physiologic parameters and other intracoronary imaging modalities, but the results are not consistent. In the early day of these investigation, IVUS showed good correlation with FFR.9) However, other reports revealed that the accuracy to predict significant FFR by minimum lumen area on IVUS was approximately 60% to 70%, which was considered unsatisfactory in clinical practice. Furthermore, the relation between IMR and IVUS parameters are not correlated with future event prediction.10)
In the era of OCT, Usui and colleagues11) also reported a higher IMR, a pure indicator of microvascular disease measured in the territory of the coronary artery with angiographically intermediate-to-severe lesions, is associated with increased prevalence of OCT-defined thin-cap fibroatheroma (TCFA), larger lipid volume index, and higher prevalence of subclinical plaque rupture.. Interestingly, both IMR and FFR were independent predictors of OCT-defined TCFAs.
The basic question related to all of intravascular modalities (IVUS, OCT, and NIRS) to detect vulnerable plaque is whether the results from the correlation study between imaging and physiologic parameters has some impact on the clinical outcome or clinical significance. Even though these correlation study could make some link between some parameters, atherosclerosis is mixture of all processes of continuous plaque disruption and healing, as evidenced by multiple layers inside plaque in autopsy studies so the link may not be translated directly into the cause and consequnces.12)
Larger prospective studies of the natural history of coronary artery disease are warranted to determine the incremental prognostic value of epicardial coronary artery stenosis severity and microvascular dysfunction in combination with plaque vulnerability for clinical outcomes.

Notes

Conflict of Interest The author has no financial conflicts of interest.

The contents of the report are the author's own views and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Korean Circulation Journal.

References

1. Pu J, Mintz GS, Brilakis ES, et al. In vivo characterization of coronary plaques: novel findings from comparing greyscale and virtual histology intravascular ultrasound and near-infrared spectroscopy. Eur Heart J. 2012; 33:372–383.
crossref
2. Kang SJ, Mintz GS, Pu J, et al. Combined IVUS and NIRS detection of fibroatheromas: histopathological validation in human coronary arteries. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 8:184–194.
3. Herrmann J, Kaski JC, Lerman A. Coronary microvascular dysfunction in the clinical setting: from mystery to reality. Eur Heart J. 2012; 33:2771–2782b.
crossref
4. Marinescu MA, Löffler AI, Ouellette M, Smith L, Kramer CM, Bourque JM. Coronary microvascular dysfunction, microvascular angina, and treatment strategies. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 8:210–220.
5. Corban MT, Lerman LO, Lerman A. Coronary microvasculature: are the small and the mighty cross-talking with the epicardial vessels? JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 11:2069–2071.
6. Fearon WF, Balsam LB, Farouque HM, et al. Novel index for invasively assessing the coronary microcirculation. Circulation. 2003; 107:3129–3132.
crossref
7. De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Smith L, Wievegg M, Heyndrickx GR. Coronary thermodilution to assess flow reserve: experimental validation. Circulation. 2001; 104:2003–2006.
8. Yang HM, Yoon MH, Lim HS, et al. Lipid-core plaque assessed by near-infrared spectroscopy and procedure related microvascular injury. Korean Circ J. 2019; 49:1010–1018.
crossref
9. Takagi A, Tsurumi Y, Ishii Y, Suzuki K, Kawana M, Kasanuki H. Clinical potential of intravascular ultrasound for physiological assessment of coronary stenosis: relationship between quantitative ultrasound tomography and pressure-derived fractional flow reserve. Circulation. 1999; 100:250–255.
10. Yang HM, Khush K, Luikart H, et al. Invasive assessment of coronary physiology predicts late mortality after heart transplantation. Circulation. 2016; 133:1945–1950.
crossref
11. Usui E, Yonetsu T, Kanaji Y, et al. Optical coherence tomography-defined plaque vulnerability in relation to functional stenosis severity and microvascular dysfunction. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 11:2058–2068.
crossref
12. Jang IK. Near infrared spectroscopy: another toy or indispensible diagnostic tool? Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012; 5:10–11.
TOOLS
ORCID iDs

Jung Ho Heo
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6491-2426

Similar articles