Search

Conventional intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) devices use piezoelectric transducers to electrically generate and receive US. With this paradigm, there are numerous challenges that restrict improvements in image quality. First, with miniaturization of the transducers to reduce device size, it can be challenging to achieve the sensitivities and bandwidths required for large tissue penetration depths and high spatial resolution. Second, complexities associated with manufacturing miniaturized electronic transducers can have significant cost implications. Third, with increasing interest in molecular characterization of tissue in-vivo, it has been challenging to incorporate optical elements for multimodality imaging with photoacoustics (PA) or near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) whilst maintaining the lateral dimensions suitable for intracoronary imaging. Optical Ultrasound (OpUS) is a new paradigm for intracoronary imaging. US is generated at the surface of a fiber optic transducer via the photoacoustic effect. Pulsed or modulated light is absorbed in an engineered coating on the fiber surface and converted to thermal energy. The subsequent temperature rise leads to a pressure rise within the coating, which results in a propagating ultrasound wave. US reflections from imaged structures are received with optical interferometry. With OpUS, high bandwidths (31.5 MHz) and pressures (21.5 MPa) have enabled imaging with axial resolutions better than 50 μm and at depths >20 mm. These values challenge those of conventional 40 MHz IVUS technology and show great potential for future clinical application. Recently developed nanocomposite coating materials, that are highly transmissive at light wavelengths used for PA and NIRS light, can facilitate multimodality imaging, thereby enabling molecular characterization.

BackgroundIntravascular imaging has been used to assess the morphology of lesions causing an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in native vessels (NV) and identify differences between plaques that ruptured (PR) and caused an event and those that ruptured without clinical manifestations. However, there is no data about the morphological and physiological characteristics of neoatherosclerotic plaques that ruptured (PR-NA) which constitute a common cause of stent failure.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed data from patients admitted with an acute myocardial infarction that had optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging of the culprit vessel before balloon pre-dilation. OCT pullbacks showing PR were segmented at every 0.4 mm. The extent of the formed cavity, lipid and calcific tissue, thrombus, and macrophages were measured, and the fibrous cap thickness (FCT) and the incidence of micro-channels and cholesterol crystals were reported. These data were used to reconstruct a representative model of the native and neoatherosclerotic lesion geometry that was processed with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) techniques to estimate the distribution of the endothelial shear stress and plaque structural stress.ResultEighty patients were included in the present analysis: 56 had PR in NV (PR-NV group) and 24 in NA segments (PR-NA group). The PR-NV group had a larger minimum lumen area (2.93 ± 2.03 vs. 2.00 ± 1.26 mm2, p = 0.015) but similar lesion length and area stenosis compared to PR-NA group. The mean FCT (186 ± 65 vs. 232 ± 80 μm, p = 0.009) and the lipid index was smaller (16.7 ± 13.8 vs. 25.9 ± 14.1, p = 0.008) while the of calcific index (8.3 ± 9.5 vs. 2.2 ± 1.6%, p = 0.002) and the incidence of micro-channels (41.4 vs. 12.5%, p = 0.013) was higher in the PR-NV group. Conversely, there was no difference in the incidence of cholesterol crystals, thrombus burden or the location of the rupture site between groups. CFD analysis revealed higher maximum endothelial shear stress (19.1 vs. 11.0 Pa) and lower maximum plaque structural stress (38.8 vs. 95.1 kPa) in the PR-NA compared to the PR-NV model.ConclusionWe reported significant morphological and physiological differences between culprit ruptured plaques in native and stented segments. Further research is needed to better understand the causes of these differences and the mechanisms regulating neoatherosclerotic lesion destabilization.