ArticleCardiology journal2025
Comparison of angiographically derived coronary radial wall strain and superficial wall stress for the characterization of plaque vulnerability.
Article in Cardiology journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From anatomy to vulnerability: A comprehensive appraisal of coronary physiology and plaque characterization.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAngiography-derived radial wall strain (RWS) estimates the radial coronary wall deformation caused by pulsatile blood pressure, whereas superficial wall stress (SWS) summarizes the comprehensive wall deformation caused by both blood pressure and cardiac motion. This study sought to investigate the difference between RWS and SWS for the association with plaque vulnerability and the impact of cardiac motion on RWS.
methodsConcurrent RWS, cardiac motion-induced bending angle change (ΔCBA), SWS, and optical coherence tomography image analyses were retrospectively performed in 49 eligible intermediate coronary lesions. Correlation and multivariate linear regression analyses were applied to investigate the difference in the correlations of RWS and SWS with plaque characteristics and the impact of ΔCBA on RWS assessment.
resultsLipid-to-cap ratio (LCR), a novel vulnerable plaque indicator, was found to be correlated with both maximum RWS (RWSmax) (r = 0.58, p < 0.001) and peak SWS (r = 0.29, p = 0.041). RWSmax tended to be more relevant to LCR in comparison with peak SWS, albeit statistically nonsignificant (z = 1.75, p = 0.080). With multivariate linear regression, LCR was independently associated with both RWSmax (normalized β = 0.49, p = 0.001) and peak SWS (normalized β = 0.34, p = 0.012), whereas ΔCBA could only affect peak SWS (normalized β = 0.29, p = 0.035). Peak time-averaged SWS showed similar results to peak SWS.
conclusionsRWS tended to be more relevant to plaque vulnerability and less affected by cyclic bending as compared with SWS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.