The surface measurement of aortic atherosclerosis: critical survey and comparison with histologic findings

Abstract

Both the reproducibility of the surface measurements of aortic atherosclerosis and the agreement between gross inspective and histologic changes were evaluated. Aortas from male broad breasted white turkeys were chosen because of the high incidence of spontaneous and typical atherosclerotic lesions in this animal strain. Ten male turkeys were killed at 33 weeks of age. The aortas were removed including the iliac bifurcation and stained with Sudan III. Each aorta was processed blindly by four pathologists with a computerized planimeter to determine normal areas, sudanophilic areas and areas covered by plaques. The analysis of variance showed significant differences among the four pathologists' measurements of sudanophilic areas ( P < 0.01) and areas covered by plaques ( P < 0.001). The coefficients of variation among the four determinations made by one pathologist on the same aorta were 3.6% for total aortic area; 10.08% for sudanophilic area; 47.6% for the area covered by plaques. On each aorta histology was performed at the level where all the four pathologists recorded the same findings at inspection, namely a normal area, a sudanophilic area, and an area covered by plaques. Important discrepancies occurred between findings at inspection and those of histologic examination: the ten areas classified as “normal” by all the four pathologists at inspection were shown at histologic examination to be normal in only two cases. In one case a musculo-elastic layer and in seven cases a fibro-elastic layer were found. The ten areas classified as “sudanophilic” by all the observers showed a fibro-elastic layer in five cases, a musculo-elastic layer in two cases and normal findings in three cases. The ten areas classified as “covered by plaques” displayed a typical atherosclerotic plaque in all cases but one. In conclusion, our data indicate that the reproducibility of gross inspective methods is low. Important discrepancies exist between findings at inspection and histologic examinations. The relevance of these findings remains to be established as far as the assessment of human atherosclerosis is concerned.