A comparison between 40 MHz intravascular ultrasound iMap imaging system and integrated backscatter intravascular ultrasound

• Published in: Journal of cardiology Vol. 61; no. 2; pp. 149 - 154
• Main Authors: Yamada, Ryotaro, MD, Okura, Hiroyuki, MD, FJCC, Kume, Teruyoshi, MD, Neishi, Yoji, MD, Kawamoto, Takahiro, MD, Miyamoto, Yoshinori, MD, Imai, Koichiro, MD, Saito, Ken, MD, Hayashida, Akihiro, MD, Yoshida, Kiyoshi, MD, FJCC
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands 01.02.2013
• Subjects: Aged; Calcinosis - diagnostic imaging; Calcinosis - pathology; Cardiovascular; Coronary Artery Disease - classification; Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging; Female; Fibrosis; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Ischemia - diagnostic imaging; Necrosis - diagnostic imaging; Necrosis - pathology; Plaque, Atherosclerotic - diagnostic imaging; Ultrasonography, Interventional - instrumentation; Ultrasonography, Interventional - methods; Intravascular ultrasound; Coronary artery disease; Atherosclerosis
• ISSN: 0914-5087; 1876-4738
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2012.10.008

Abstract Background iMap is a newly developed intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) tissue characterization system based on pattern recognition of the radio frequency (RF) signals. Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare tissue characterization between iMap and another previously validated tissue characterization system, integrated backscatter (IB)-IVUS in vivo and to clarify similarities and differences between these two methods. Methods A total of 31 lesions from 16 patients with ischemic heart disease were studied. IVUS imaging was performed using 40 MHz IVUS catheter. RF signals from each lesion were then exported to analyze tissue characterization using both iMap and IB-IVUS. By iMap, coronary plaque was classified into four categories, fibrotic, lipidic, necrotic, or calcified. By IB-IVUS, coronary plaque was classified into four categories, fibrosis, lipid pool, dense fibrosis, or calcification. After the images were acquired, IB-IVUS and iMap images were compared at exactly the same cross-sections. Because severe calcification is a perfect reflector, dense calcification lesions (>20%) were excluded. Results Both fibrotic and calcified by iMap correlated well with fibrosis and calcification by IB-IVUS (fibrotic vs. fibrosis: r2 = 0.522, p < 0.001, calcified vs. calcification: r2 = 0.560, p < 0.001). Although lipidic by iMap did not correlate with lipid pool by IB-IVUS, necrotic by iMap correlated well with lipid pool by IB-IVUS ( r2 = 0.480, p < 0.001). Conclusion Although tissue types classified by iMap correlated well with corresponding tissue type by IB-IVUS, some discrepancy presented between the two systems. These results may call for careful interpretation of the tissue types obtained by the different IVUS tissue characterization systems.