Comparison of angiographically derived coronary radial wall strain and superficial wall stress for the characterization of plaque vulnerability.

Zhiqing Wang, Jiayue Huang, Chunming Li, Tianxiao Xu, Huihong Hong, Xinkai Qu, Lianglong Chen, Shengxian Tu
{"title":"Comparison of angiographically derived coronary radial wall strain and superficial wall stress for the characterization of plaque vulnerability.","authors":"Zhiqing Wang, Jiayue Huang, Chunming Li, Tianxiao Xu, Huihong Hong, Xinkai Qu, Lianglong Chen, Shengxian Tu","doi":"10.5603/cj.101778","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Angiography-derived radial wall strain (RWS) estimates the radial coronary wall deformation caused by pulsatile blood pressure, whereas superficial wall stress (SWS) summarizes the comprehensive wall deformation caused by both blood pressure and cardiac motion. This study sought to investigate the difference between RWS and SWS for the association with plaque vulnerability and the impact of cardiac motion on RWS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Concurrent RWS, cardiac motion-induced bending angle change (ΔCBA), SWS, and optical coherence tomography image analyses were retrospectively performed in 49 eligible intermediate coronary lesions. Correlation and multivariate linear regression analyses were applied to investigate the difference in the correlations of RWS and SWS with plaque characteristics and the impact of ΔCBA on RWS assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Lipid-to-cap ratio (LCR), a novel vulnerable plaque indicator, was found to be correlated with both maximum RWS (RWSmax) (r = 0.58, p < 0.001) and peak SWS (r = 0.29, p = 0.041). RWSmax tended to be more relevant to LCR in comparison with peak SWS, albeit statistically nonsignificant (z = 1.75, p = 0.080). With multivariate linear regression, LCR was independently associated with both RWSmax (normalized β = 0.49, p = 0.001) and peak SWS (normalized β = 0.34, p = 0.012), whereas ΔCBA could only affect peak SWS (normalized β = 0.29, p = 0.035). Peak time-averaged SWS showed similar results to peak SWS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RWS tended to be more relevant to plaque vulnerability and less affected by cyclic bending as compared with SWS.</p>","PeriodicalId":93923,"journal":{"name":"Cardiology journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiology journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/cj.101778","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Angiography-derived radial wall strain (RWS) estimates the radial coronary wall deformation caused by pulsatile blood pressure, whereas superficial wall stress (SWS) summarizes the comprehensive wall deformation caused by both blood pressure and cardiac motion. This study sought to investigate the difference between RWS and SWS for the association with plaque vulnerability and the impact of cardiac motion on RWS.

Methods: Concurrent RWS, cardiac motion-induced bending angle change (ΔCBA), SWS, and optical coherence tomography image analyses were retrospectively performed in 49 eligible intermediate coronary lesions. Correlation and multivariate linear regression analyses were applied to investigate the difference in the correlations of RWS and SWS with plaque characteristics and the impact of ΔCBA on RWS assessment.

Results: Lipid-to-cap ratio (LCR), a novel vulnerable plaque indicator, was found to be correlated with both maximum RWS (RWSmax) (r = 0.58, p < 0.001) and peak SWS (r = 0.29, p = 0.041). RWSmax tended to be more relevant to LCR in comparison with peak SWS, albeit statistically nonsignificant (z = 1.75, p = 0.080). With multivariate linear regression, LCR was independently associated with both RWSmax (normalized β = 0.49, p = 0.001) and peak SWS (normalized β = 0.34, p = 0.012), whereas ΔCBA could only affect peak SWS (normalized β = 0.29, p = 0.035). Peak time-averaged SWS showed similar results to peak SWS.

Conclusions: RWS tended to be more relevant to plaque vulnerability and less affected by cyclic bending as compared with SWS.

冠脉造影所得的冠状动脉径向壁应变和浅壁应力对斑块易损性表征的比较。
背景:血管造影衍生的桡动脉壁应变(RWS)估计脉搏血压引起的桡动脉壁变形,而浅壁应力(SWS)总结了血压和心脏运动引起的桡动脉壁综合变形。本研究旨在探讨RWS和SWS之间的差异与斑块易损性的关系以及心脏运动对RWS的影响。方法:回顾性分析49例符合条件的中间冠状动脉病变并发RWS、心脏运动引起的弯曲角度改变(ΔCBA)、SWS和光学相干断层成像。应用相关分析和多元线性回归分析,探讨RWS和SWS与斑块特征相关性的差异,以及ΔCBA对RWS评估的影响。结果:脂质帽比(LCR)是一种新的易损斑块指标,与最大RWS (RWSmax) (r = 0.58, p < 0.001)和峰值SWS (r = 0.29, p = 0.041)相关。与峰值SWS相比,RWSmax倾向于与LCR更相关,尽管无统计学意义(z = 1.75, p = 0.080)。通过多元线性回归,LCR与RWSmax(归一化β = 0.49, p = 0.001)和SWS峰(归一化β = 0.34, p = 0.012)均独立相关,而ΔCBA仅影响SWS峰(归一化β = 0.29, p = 0.035)。峰值时间平均SWS的结果与峰值SWS相似。结论:与SWS相比,RWS更倾向于与斑块易损性相关,且受循环弯曲的影响较小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信