Abstract

BackgroundPatients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are at high risk for cardiovascular events, which usually arise from the rupture of a vulnerable coronary plaque. The minimal fibrous cap thickness (FCT) overlying a necrotic lipid core is an established predictor for plaque rupture. Recently, coronary calcification has emerged as a relevant feature of plaque vulnerability. However, the impact of T2DM on these morphological plaque parameters is largely unexplored. Therefore, this study aimed to compare differences of coronary plaque morphology in patients with and without T2DM with a particular focus on coronary calcification.MethodsIn 91 patients (T2DM = 56, non-T2DM = 35) with 105 coronary de novo lesions (T2DM = 56, non-T2DM = 49) plaque morphology and calcification were analyzed using optical coherence tomography (OCT) prior to coronary intervention.ResultsPatients with T2DM had a lower minimal FCT (80.4 ± 27.0 µm vs. 106.8 ± 27.8 µm, p < 0.001) and a higher percent area stenosis (77.9 ± 8.1% vs. 71.7 ± 11.2%, p = 0.001) compared to non-diabetic subjects. However, patients with and without T2DM had a similar total number of calcifications (4.0 ± 2.6 vs. 4.2 ± 3.1, p = ns) and no significant difference was detected in the number of micro- (0.34 ± 0.79 vs. 0.31 ± 0.71), spotty (2.11 ± 1.77 vs. 2.37 ± 1.89) or macro-calcifications (1.55 ± 1.13 vs. 1.53 ± 0.71, all p = ns). The mean calcium arc (82.3 ± 44.8° vs. 73.7 ± 31.6), the mean thickness of calcification (0.54 ± 0.13 mm vs. 0.51 ± 0.15 mm), the mean calcified area (0.99 ± 0.72 mm2 vs. 0.78 ± 0.49 mm2), the mean depth of calcification (172 ± 192 μm vs. 160 ± 76 μm) and the cap thickness overlying the calcification (50 ± 71 μm vs. 62 ± 61 μm) did not differ between the diabetic and non-diabetic groups (all p = ns).ConclusionT2DM has an impact on the minimal FCT of the coronary target lesion, but not on localization, size, shape or extent of calcification. Thus, the minimal FCT overlying the necrotic lipid core but not calcification is likely to contribute to the increased plaque vulnerability observed in patients with T2DM.

Highlights

  • Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are at high risk for cardiovascular events, which usually arise from the rupture of a vulnerable coronary plaque

  • We and others have demonstrated using optical coherence tomography (OCT), that coronary lesions of patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are characterized by several features of plaque vulnerability, including a higher frequency of thin-capped fibroatheromas (TCFA), a larger lipid core, the presence of microvessels and/or macrophages suggesting coronary inflammation [5, 6]

  • As microcalcifications are a novel feature of coronary plaque vulnerability, this study investigated if the increased cardiovascular risk of patients with T2DM may be explained by an altered localization, size, shape or extent of calcifications within coronary lesions

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are at high risk for cardiovascular events, which usually arise from the rupture of a vulnerable coronary plaque. Coronary calcification has emerged as a relevant feature of plaque vulnerability. This study aimed to compare differences of coronary plaque morphology in patients with and without T2DM with a particular focus on coronary calcification. Cardiovascular events usually arise from rupture of a vulnerable, coronary plaque [4]. We and others have demonstrated using optical coherence tomography (OCT), that coronary lesions of patients with T2DM are characterized by several features of plaque vulnerability, including a higher frequency of thin-capped fibroatheromas (TCFA), a larger lipid core, the presence of microvessels and/or macrophages suggesting coronary inflammation [5, 6]. Given that small and superficial calcifications contribute to lesion vulnerability, OCT presently represents the most accurate method to determine localization, size, shape and extent of calcifications within coronary lesions in vivo [14]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.