Evidence Hub

Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy unmasks high-risk atherosclerotic features in human coronary artery disease

Chen M, Suwannaphoom K, Sanaiha Y, Luo Y, Benharash P, Fishbein MC, Packard RRS

FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, 2024

61 participants

Abstract

Coronary plaque rupture remains the prominent mechanism of myocardial infarction. Accurate identification of rupture-prone plaque may improve clinical management. This study assessed the discriminatory performance of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) in human cardiac explants to detect high-risk atherosclerotic features that portend rupture risk. In this single-center, prospective study, n = 26 cardiac explants were collected for EIS interrogation of the three major coronary arteries. Vessels in which advancement of the EIS catheter without iatrogenic plaque disruption was rendered impossible were not assessed. N = 61 vessels underwent EIS measurement and histological analyses. Plaques were dichotomized according to previously established high rupture-risk parameter thresholds. Diagnostic performance was determined via receiver operating characteristic areas-under-the-curve (AUC). Necrotic cores were identified in n = 19 vessels (median area 1.53 mm2) with a median fibrous cap thickness of 62 μm. Impedance was significantly greater in plaques with necrotic core area ≥1.75 mm2 versus 65 μm (19.1 ± 3.5 kΩ vs. 6.5 ± 0.9 kΩ, p = .004), and ≥20 macrophages per 0.3 mm-diameter high-power field (HPF) versus <20 macrophages per HPF (19.8 ± 4.1 kΩ vs. 10.2 ± 0.9 kΩ, p = .002). Impedance identified necrotic core area ≥1.75 mm2, fibrous cap thickness ≤65 μm, and ≥20 macrophages per HPF with AUCs of 0.889 (95% CI: 0.716-1.000) (p = .013), 0.852 (0.646-1.000) (p = .025), and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 61 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free