Key result
Combined use of magnetic resonance plaque imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound significantly correlated with symptoms of carotid plaque vulnerability (P<0.0001), whereas MRI alone did not (P=0.07).
Why the study?
The study aimed to improve the assessment quality of carotid plaque vulnerability by combining magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound.
Does the combined use of magnetic resonance plaque imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound improve the detection of vulnerable carotid plaques in patients with internal carotid artery stenosis?
Observational (n=71)
Does the combined use of magnetic resonance plaque imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound improve the detection of vulnerable carotid plaques in patients with internal carotid artery stenosis?
p-value: p=<0.0001
The complementary use of MRI and CEUS significantly improves the detection of vulnerable carotid plaques compared to MRI alone.
Should not yet change carotid plaque risk assessment; leaves open whether combined imaging improves stratification over MRI alone.
Background We aimed to improve the assessment quality of plaque vulnerability with combined use of magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound ( CEUS ). Methods and Results We prospectively enrolled 71 patients with internal carotid artery stenosis who underwent carotid endarterectomy and performed preoperative CEUS and magnetic resonance plaque imaging. We distinguished high-signal-intensity plaques ( HIP s) and non- HIP s based on magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition with gradient echo images. We graded them according to the CEUS contrast effect and compared the CEUS images with the carotid endarterectomy specimens. Among the 70 plaques, except 1 carotid endarterectomy tissue sample failure, 59 were classified as HIP s (43 symptomatic) and 11 were classified as non- HIP s (5 symptomatic). Although the magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition with gradient echo findings alone had no significant correlation with symptoms ( P=0.07), concomitant use of magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition with gradient echo and CEUS findings did show a significant correlation ( P<0.0001). CEUS showed that all 5 symptomatic non- HIP s had a high-contrast effect. These 5 plaques were histopathologically confirmed as vulnerable, with extensive neovascularization but only a small amount of intraplaque hemorrhage. Conclusions Complementary use of magnetic resonance imaging and CEUS to detect intraplaque hemorrhage and neovascularization in plaques can be useful for evaluating plaque vulnerability, consistent with the destabilization process associated with neovessel formation and subsequent intraplaque hemorrhage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Motoyama et al. (2019) conducted an observational in internal carotid artery stenosis (n=71). Combined use of magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound vs. Magnetic resonance imaging alone was evaluated on Correlation with symptoms (p=<0.0001). Combined use of magnetic resonance plaque imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound significantly correlated with symptoms of carotid plaque vulnerability (P<0.0001), whereas MRI alone did not (P=0.07).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: