Intravascular Ultrasound Imaging after Coronary Ultrasound Ablation

  • Dietmar H. Koschyk
  • Jacobus Reimers
  • Wolfgang Steffen
  • Shristian W. Hamm
Part of the Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine book series (DICM, volume 178)


The advantage of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) compared with coronary angiography relates to the ability to assess not only the vessel lumen but also the morphology of the vessel and plaque. Based on pathohistologic studies, the accuracy of intravascular imaging is very high and reliable before as well as after coronary interventions [1–7]. The following analysis of 20 patients after undergoing ultrasound ablation was performed to investigate the effect of therapeutic ultrasound ablation on coronary plaque with the aim of better understanding the mechanisms of this new therapeutic device.


Ablation Catheter Intravascular Ultrasound Lumen Diameter Coronary Plaque IVUS Catheter 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Pandian N, Kreis A, Brockway B, Isner JM, Sacharoff A, Boleza E, Caro R, Muller D. Ultrasound angioscopy: Real-time, two-dimensional intraluminal ultrasound imaging of blood vessels. Am J Cardiol 62:493–494, 1988.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Siegel RJ, Ariani M, Chae JS, Bowers J, Forrester JS, Fishbein MC. Histopathologic validation of angioscopy and intravascular ultrasound. Circulation 84:109–117, 1991.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nishimura RA, Edwards WD, Warnes CA, Reeder GS, Holmes DR, Tajik AJ, Yock PG. Intravascular ultrasound imaging: In vitro validation and pathologic correlation. J Am Coll Cardiol 16:145–154, 1990.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Potkin BN, Bartorelli AL, Gessert JM, Neville RF, Almagor Y, Roberts WC, Leon MB. Coronary artery imaging with intravascular high frequency ultrasound. Circulation 81: 1575–1585, 1990.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gussenhoven EJ, Essed CE, Lancee CT, Mastik F, Frietman P, van Egmond FC, Reiber J, Bosch H, van Urk H, Roelandt J. Arterial wall characteristics determined by intravascular ultrasound imaging: An in vitro study. J Am Coll Cardiol 14:947–952, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tobis JM, Mallery JA, Gessert J, Griffith J, Mahon D, Bessen M, Moriuchi M, McLeay L, McRae M, Henry WL. Intravascular ultrasound cross sectional arterial imaging before and after balloon angioplasty in vitro. Circulation 80:873–882, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koschyk DH, Chen C, Lorke D, Hamper K, Hamm CW. Is intravascular ultrasound valid for assessing results of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty? — Comparison with patho-histology. Circulation 86:1456, 1992.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Waller BF, Pinkerton CA, Slack JD. Intravascular ultrasound: A histological study of vessels during life. Circulation 86:2305–2310, 1992.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kovach JA, Mintz GS, Pichard AD, Kent KM, Popma JJ, Satler LF, Leon MB. Sequential intravascular ultrasound characterization of the mechanisms of rotational atherectomy and adjunct balloon angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 22:1024–1032, 1993.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Neppira EA. Acoustic cavitation. Phys Rep 61:159–251, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Koschyk DH, Terres W, Weber P, Chen C, Hamm CW. Less vascular injury after coronary rotablation combined with low pressure angioplasty? Investigation with intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 21:444A, 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dietmar H. Koschyk
  • Jacobus Reimers
  • Wolfgang Steffen
  • Shristian W. Hamm

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations