Carotid intraplaque neovascularization predicts coronary artery disease and cardiovascular events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: It is thought that the majority of cardiovascular (CV) events are caused by vulnerable plaque. Such lesions are rupture prone, in part due to neovascularization. It is postulated that plaque vulnerability may be a systemic process and that vulnerable lesions may co-exist at multiple sites in the vascular bed. This study sought to examine whether carotid plaque vulnerability, characterized by contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)-assessed intraplaque neovascularization (IPN), was associated with significant coronary artery disease (CAD) and future CV events. METHODS AND RESULTS: We investigated carotid IPN using carotid CEUS in 459 consecutive stable patients referred for coronary angiography. IPN was graded based on the presence and location of microbubbles within each plaque (0, not visible; 1, peri-adventitial; and 2, plaque core). The grades of each plaque were averaged to obtain an overall score per patient. Coronary plaque severity and complexity was also determined angiographically. Patients were followed for 30 days following their angiogram. This study found that a higher CEUS-assessed carotid IPN score was associated with significant CAD (≥50% stenosis) (1.8 ± 0.4 vs. 0.5 ± 0.6, P < 0.0001) and greater complexity of coronary lesions (1.7 ± 0.5 vs. 1.3 ± 0.8, P < 0.0001). Furthermore, an IPN score ≥1.25 could predict significant CAD with a high sensitivity (92%) and specificity (89%). The Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a significantly higher proportion of participants having CV events with an IPN score ≥1.25 (P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Carotid plaque neovascularization was found to be predictive of significant and complex CAD and future CV events. CEUS-assessed carotid IPN is a clinically useful tool for CV risk stratification in high-risk cardiac patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".