Table 2.
Intravascular imaging features of stable coronary plaque progression.
| Variable |
Progressing (n = 23) |
Regressing (n = 23) |
Odds ratio (95% CI) |
P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intravascular ultrasound | ||||
| Baseline | ||||
| Plaque burden, % | 39 (33, 59) | 53 (45, 58) | - | .04 |
| Plaque area, mm2 | 6.5 (4.8, 9.7) | 9 (7.3, 10.9) | - | .01 |
| Eccentricity | 0.8 (0.73, 0.87) | 0.78 (0.57, 0.86) | - | ns |
| EEM size, mm2 | 15.8 (13.3, 18.7) | 16.2 (13.1, 22) | - | ns |
| LAPS | −0.8 (−1.4, 0.5) | 0.3 (−0.96, 2) | - | ns |
| Follow-up | - | |||
| Plaque burden, % | 45 (38, 58) | 47 (39, 54) | - | ns |
| Plaque area, mm2 | 7.2 (5.3, 9.3) | 7.5 (6.4, 8.4) | - | ns |
| Eccentricity | 0.81 (0.62, 0.87) | 0.77 (0.64, 0.88) | - | ns |
| EEM size, mm2 | 16.6 (12.8, 18.9) | 15.2 (12.8, 21.4) | - | ns |
| LAPS | −0.61 (−1.5, 0.5) | −0.28 (−1.3, 0.83) | - | ns |
| Δ Baseline follow-up | - | |||
| Plaque burden, % | 2.9 (1.1, 5) | −4.9 (−7.5, −1.9) | - | <.001 |
| Plaque area, mm2 | 0.53 (0.17, 1.3) | −1.1 (−1.7, −0.5) | - | <.001 |
| Eccentricity | 0.004 (−0.01, 0.03) | 0.02 (−0.02, 0.07) | - | ns |
| EEM size, mm2 | 0.12 (−0.15, 0.89) | −0.52 (−0.85, 0.08) | - | .003 |
| LAPS | −0.02 (−0.43, 0.33) | −0.23 (−1.5, 0.33) | - | .05 |
| Plaque area, mm2 | - | <.001 | ||
| Eccentricity | - | ns | ||
| EEM size, mm2 | - | .003 | ||
| LAPS | - | .05 | ||
| Optical coherence tomographya | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantitative index | ||||
| MLA, mm2 | 4.5 (4, 6.4) | 5 (3.8, 7) | 0.9 (0.7-1.2) | ns |
| MLD, mm | 2.3 (1.9, 2.7) | 2.1 (2, 2.7) | 0.8 (0.3-2.5) | ns |
| % area stenosis | 37 (20, 54) | 37 (14, 48) | 2.4 (0.2-37.2) | ns |
| Mean lipid arc, ° | 102 (35, 194) | 101 (0, 163) | 1 (1-1) | ns |
| Maximum lipid arc, ° | 150 (97, 290) | 140 (0, 219) | 1 (1-1) | ns |
| Mean calcium arc, ° | 0 (0, 8) | 9 (0, 39) | 1 (1-1) | ns |
| Maximum calcium arc, ° | 0 (0, 38) | 40 (0, 84) | 1 (1-1) | ns |
| Reference lumen area, mm2 | 7.9 (6.8, 9.6) | 7.5 (4.9, 11.4) | 1 (0.9-1.2) | ns |
| Reference mean diameter, mm | 3.2 (2.9, 3.5) | 3.1 (2.5, 3.8) | 1.2 (0.5-3.4) | ns |
| Minimal FCT, μmb | 90 (80, 150) | 100 (70, 130) | 0.3 (0.02-3.5) | ns |
| Mean FCT, μmb | 250 (200, 290) | 260 (240, 320) | 0.1 (0.01-0.7) | .01 |
| TCFA <65 μm | 3 (13) | 3 (13) | 1.8 (0.4-13.3) | ns |
| TCFA <100 μm | 12 (51) | 8 (34) | 1.4 (0.8-3.3) | ns |
| Plaque type (N = 575 frames) | ||||
| Lipid | 334 (58) | 315 (55) | 1 (0.9-1.3) | ns |
| Calcified | 48 (8) | 51 (9) | 1 (1-1) | ns |
| Fibrocalcific | 83 (14) | 69 (12) | 1 (1-1.1) | ns |
| No plaque | 110 (19) | 140 (24) | 1 (1-1) | ns |
| Multivariable logistic regression of predictive imaging featuresc | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline plaque burden, % | - | - | 0.71 (0.36-1.4) | .32 |
| Average FCT, μmb | - | - | 0.13 (0.02-0.998) | .05 |
| Semiautomated volumetric FC analysis (N = 17 pairs)d | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean FCT, μm | 243 ± 57 | 294 ± 79 | - | .005 |
| Minimal FCT, μm | 56 ± 50 | 96 ± 73 | - | .008 |
| Frames with FCT <65 μm, % | 13 ± 18 | 6 ± 12 | - | .01 |
| Frames with FCT <100 μm, % | 36 ± 28 | 20 ± 27 | - | <.001 |
| Frames with FCT <200 μm, % | 82 ± 24 | 65 ± 34 | - | .04 |
| Total FC SA <65 μm, mm2 | 0.03 ± 0.05 | 0.01 ± 0.02 | - | .02 |
| Total FC SA <100 μm, mm2 | 0.3 ± 0.4 | 0.2 ± 0.3 | - | .04 |
| Total FC SA <200 μm, mm2 | 4.9 ± 4.7 | 3.2 ± 4.4 | - | ns |
| Total FC SA <65 μm, % | 0.2 ± 0.3 | 0.2 ± 0.6 | - | .02 |
| Total FC SA <100 μm, % | 2 ± 3 | 1 ± 3 | - | .03 |
| Total FC SA <200 μm, % | 28 ± 21 | 17 ± 22 | - | ns |
| FC volume, mm3 | 3.8 ± 2.4 | 4.6 ± 3.8 | - | ns |
| Mean lipid arc | 134 ± 63 | 135 ± 87 | - | ns |
| Maximum lipid arc | 197 ± 81 | 184 ± 94 | - | ns |
Data are presented as median (25th, 75th percentile) for continuous variables, n (%) for categorical variables, and mean ± SD for features by automated FC analysis. Lipid arcs, FCT, and TCFA, as well as calcium arcs were only calculated in patients with identifiable lipid or calcium plaques, respectively. Of 23 paired samples, 17 pairs had analyzable lipid plaque. TCFA denotes the number of segments with at least 1 TCFA of <65 μm or <100 μm.
EEM, external elastic membrane; FC, fibrous cap; FCT, fibrous cap thickness; LAPS, Liverpool Active Plaque Score; MLA, minimal lumen area; MLD, minimal lumen diameter; ns, nonsignificant; SA, surface area; TCFA, thin-cap fibroatheroma.
Experienced-reader analysis. Exact conditional logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds of experiencing plaque progression as a function of univariable clinical measures.
Odds ratio per 100 μm increase in FCT.
Multivariable analysis using the 2-predictor model because of the limited size of the matched sample.
Optical coherence tomography–based segment-level analysis.