Why the study?
It was not known whether a sex difference exists in the association between perivascular inflammation and plaque vulnerability.
Is there a sex-specific association between perivascular inflammation and plaque vulnerability?
Is there a sex-specific association between perivascular inflammation and plaque vulnerability?
Perivascular inflammation assessed by CTA is associated with OCT-derived plaque vulnerability in women, but not in men, suggesting sex-specific mechanisms in coronary atherosclerosis.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports sex-specific plaque vulnerability assessment; leaves open causal role and need for longitudinal validation before clinical use.
BACKGROUND: It is not known whether there is a sex difference in the association between perivascular inflammation and plaque vulnerability. The aim of this study was to investigate the sex-specific association between perivascular inflammation and plaque vulnerability. METHODS: Patients who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography and optical coherence tomography were enrolled. All images were analyzed at a core laboratory. The level of perivascular inflammation was assessed by pericoronary adipose tissue attenuation on computed tomography angiography and the level of plaque vulnerability by optical coherence tomography. Patients were classified into 3 groups according to tertile levels of culprit vessel pericoronary adipose tissue attenuation (low inflammation, ≤-73.1 Hounsfield units; moderate inflammation, -73.0 to -67.0 Hounsfield units; or high inflammation, ≥-66.9 Hounsfield units). RESULTS: <0.001 for low versus high inflammation, respectively). However, no significant differences were observed among the 3 groups in men. CONCLUSIONS: Perivascular inflammation was associated with a higher prevalence of thin-cap fibroatheroma and more significant macrophage accumulation in women but not in men. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04523194.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kinoshita et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: