BACKGROUND: Recent studies show that virtual histology intravascular ultrasound (VH-IVUS) can identify plaques at high risk of rupture, such as thin-capped fibroatheromata, raising the possibility of immediate targeted intervention. However, plaque classification entails border recognition and subjective assessment of plaque architecture, introducing inter-observer variability without confirmation by core-labs. Furthermore, the accuracy of local versus core-laboratory VH-IVUS plaque classification and effects of different plaque definitions have not been examined. METHODS AND RESULTS: Local observers classified 100 VH-IVUS-defined coronary plaques to determine single center inter-observer variability; multi-center variability was determined by comparison with VH-IVUS core-laboratory analysis, and compared with gray-scale IVUS. Frequency of plaque types using different published plaque definitions also was determined. Single-center VH-IVUS inter-observer agreement was strong (kappa=0.86), but lower for thin-capped fibroatheromatas (k=0.59) because of observer judgments on presence and location of confluent necrotic core. Multi-center inter-observer agreement for plaque classification was lower again (k=0.71), particularly for thin-capped fibroatheromatas (k=0.56). Different plaque definitions further reduced VH-IVUS-defined thin-capped fibroatheromata numbers by 44%. The diagnostic accuracy of gray-scale IVUS to identify thin-capped fibroatheromata was poor for both observers (21 and 29% correct), with low inter-observer agreement (k=0.14). CONCLUSIONS: VH-IVUS plaque classification, and particularly VH-IVUS-defined thin-capped fibroatheromata identification, varies significantly between local observers, and particularly in comparison with core-laboratory analysis. Differences in VH-IVUS plaque definitions introduce further variability between studies. These factors reduce the use of VH-IVUS plaque classification to guide intervention in a "live" clinical setting, and also affect comparison of diagnostic accuracy and natural history of plaques between studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Obaid et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: