Differences in total plaque burden between plaque rupture and plaque erosion: A combined computed tomography angiography and optical coherence tomography study.

Backgrounds: Coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) allows for the assessment of atherosclerotic plaque burden across the entire coronary vasculature. No studies have examined the relationship between the underlying pathology of the culprit lesion and total plaque burden in patients with acute coronary syndromes. The aim of this study was to compare the total plaque burden between patients with plaque rupture versus plaque erosion.

Methods: A total of 232 patients who presented with their first non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and underwent both CTA and optical coherence tomography imaging before intervention were selected. Quantitative analysis was performed using semi-automated software (Autoplaque version 3.0, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center). An attenuation of <30 Hounsfield units defined low-density non-calcified plaque (LDNCP). All 3 vessels were assessed using the modified 17-segment American Heart Association model for coronary segment classification.

Results: Among 232 patients, 125 (53.9%) had plaque rupture and 107 (46.1%) had plaque erosion. Total plaque burden (48.2 [39.8-54.9] % vs. 44.1 [38.6-50.0] %, P ​= ​0.006), total non-calcified plaque (NCP) burden (46.6 [39.1-53.3] % vs. 43.0 [37.6-49.2] %, P ​= ​0.013), total LDNCP burden (2.3 [1.4-3.0] % vs. 1.7 [1.2-2.6] %, P ​= ​0.016), and total calcified plaque (CP) burden (0.8 [0.1-1.6] % vs. 0.4 [0.0-1.4] %, P ​= ​0.047) were significantly greater in patients with culprit plaque rupture than in those with culprit plaque erosion.

Conclusion: Patients with plaque rupture, compared with those with plaque erosion, had a greater total plaque burden, NCP burden, LDNCP burden, and CP burden.

Clinical trial registration: URL: https://www.

Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04523194.