Abstract
Patients who suffer from diabetes mellitus and present coronary artery disease are at a higher risk of cardiovascular events. The coronary arteries of diabetic patients present a diffuse process of atherosclerosis with frequent distal involvement, being prone to acute cardiovascular events. Diabetics present an increased rate of developing coronary artery remodeling, negative remodeling being representative for this class of patients; this process is characterized by vessel shrinkage and an increased rate of coronary calcium accumulation that is a predictor for cardiovascular risk. Currently, it is desired to improve the treatment of diabetic patients with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS), because of their reduced risk of restenosis and the ability to restore coronary function, including vasomotion, adaptive shear stress, and expansive remodeling. Optical coherence tomography, intravascular ultrasound and multi-slice computed tomography are imaging techniques used for a high accuracy of diagnosis in coronary artery disease. This manuscript is a review that aims to highlight imaging techniques used for evaluating the functional impact of coronary lesions in diabetic patients who underwent coronary PCI with bioresorbable scaffolds and to describe the functional markers that show the specificity for predicting coronary artery disease.
REFERENCES
1. Roffi M, Angiolillo DJ, Kappetein AP. Current concepts on coronary revascularization in diabetic patients. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:2748-2757.
2. Srinivasan MP, Kamath PK, Bhat NM. Severity of coronary artery disease in type 2 diabetes mellitus: Does the timing matter. Indian Heart J. 2016;68:158-163.
3. Mintz GS. Diabetic Coronary Artery Disease – How Little We Know and How Little Intravascular Ultrasound Has Taught Us. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:263-265.
4. McCullough PA, Fazel P, Choi JW. Screening, Diagnosis, and Management of CAD in Asymptomatic Diabetic Patients. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:1011-1012.
5. Varnava AM, Mills PG, Davies MJ. Relationship Between Coronary Artery Remodeling and Plaque Vulnerability. Circulation. 2002;105:939-943.
6. Hong YJ, Jeong MH, Choi YH, et al. Positive remodeling is associated with more plaque vulnerability and higher frequency of plaque prolapse accompanied with post-procedural cardiac enzyme elevation compared with intermediate/negative remodeling in patients with acute myocardial infarction. J Cardiol. 2009;53:278-287.
7. Erbel R, Lehmann N, Churzidse S, et al. Progression of coronary artery calcification seems to be inevitable, but predictable – results of the Heinz Nixdorf Recall (HNR) study. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2960-2971.
8. Gaur S, Øvrehus KA, Dey D, et al. Coronary plaque quantification and fractional flow reserve by coronary computed tomography angiography identify ischaemia-causing lesions. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:1220-1227.
9. Greenland P, Bonow RO, Brundage BH, et al. A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Clinical Expert Consensus Task Force (ACCF/AHA Writing Committee to Update the 2000 Expert Consensus Document on Electron Beam Computed Tomography, ACCF/AHA 2007 Clinical Expert Consensus Document on Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring By Computed Tomography in Global Cardiovascular Risk Assessment and in Evaluation of Patients With Chest Pain. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:378-402.
10. Raggi P, Shaw LJ, Berman DS, et al. Prognostic value of coronary artery calcium screening in subjects with and without diabetes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:1663-1669.
11. Thondapu V, Bourantas CV, Foin N, Jang IK, Serruys PW, Barlis P. Biomechanical stress in coronary atherosclerosis: emerging insights from computational modeling. Eur Heart J. 2017;38:81-92.
12. Chatzizisis YS, Coskun AU, Jonas M, Edelman ER, Feldman CL, Stone PH. Role of Endothelial Shear Stress in the Natural History of Coronary Atherosclerosis and Vascular Remodeling. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:2379-2393.
13. van der Giessen AG, Groen HC, Doriot PA, et al. The influence of boundary conditions on wall shear stress distribution in patients specific coronary trees. J Biomech. 2011;44:1089-1095.
14. Koskinas KC, Chatzizisis YS, Antoniadis AP, Giannoglou GD. Role of endothelial shear stress in stent restenosis and thrombosis: pathophysiologic mechanisms and implications for clinical translation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1337-1349.
15. Tamburino C, Capranzano P, Gori T, et al. 1-Year Outcomes of Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents A Propensity-Matched Comparison of the GHOST-EU and XIENCE V USA Registries. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:440-449.
16. Wiebe J, Nef HM, Hamm CW. Current status of bioresorbable scaffolds in the treatment of coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:2541-2551.
17. Abizaid A, Costa JR Jr, Gibson CM. Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Daily Clinical Practice Is the Essential Really Invisible to the Eyes? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:802-804.
18. Byrne RA, Serruys PW, Baumbach A, et al. Report of a European Society of Cardiology-European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions task force on the evaluation of coronary stents in Europe: executive summary. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:2608-2620.
19. Muramatsu T, Onuma Y, van Geuns RJ, et al. 1-Year Clinical Outcomes of Diabetic Patients Treated With Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:482-493.
20. Schoos MM, Clemmensen P, Dangas GD. Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents and Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Patients With Diabetes. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:494-496.
21. Ehara S, Kobayashi Y, Yoshiyama M, et al. Spotty calcification typifies the culprit plaque in patients with acute myocardial infarction: an intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation. 2004;110:3424-3429.
22. Prati F, Guagliumi G, Mintz GS, et al. Expert review document part 2: methodology, terminology and clinical applications of optical coherence tomography for the assessment of interventional procedures. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:2513-2520.
23. Matter CM, Stuber M, Nahrendorf M. Imaging of the unstable plaque: how far have we got. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:2566-2574.
24. Hong MK, Mintz GS, Lee CW, et al. A three-vessel virtual histology intravascular ultrasound analysis of frequency and distribution of thin-cap fibroatheromas in patients with acute coronary syndrome or stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 2008;101:568-572.
25. Prati F, Regar E, Mintz GS, et al. Expert review document on methodology, terminology, and clinical applications of optical coherence tomography: physical principles, methodology of image acquisition, and clinical application for assessment of coronary arteries and atherosclerosis. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:401-415.
26. Sun Z, Choo GH, Ng KH. Coronary CT angiography: current status and continuing challenges. Br J Radiol. 2012;85:495-510.
27. Pundziute G, Schuijf J, Jukema J, et al. Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:62-70.
