Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 27, 2026

Ultrasound Assessment of Endothelial-Dependent Flow-Mediated Vasodilation of the Brachial Artery in Clinical Research
Published on: October 22, 2014
Differences in coronary plaque characteristics between patients with and those without peripheral arterial disease
Krzysztof L Bryniarski1, Erika Yamamoto, Higuma Takumi
1aCardiology Division bBiostatistics Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA cDivision of Cardiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Introduction:
Cardiovascular mortality of patients with combined peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and coronary artery disease (CAD) is twice as high as that in those with either disease alone. It is known that patients with PAD undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention have a higher incidence of adverse cardiac events such as myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization.
Objective:
In this study, we compared the detailed characteristics of culprit and nonculprit plaques between patients with and those without PAD using optical coherence tomography.
Patients And Methods:
We performed propensity score matching using the following variables: (i) age; (ii) sex; (iii) clinical presentation; (iv) diabetes mellitus; (v) hyperlipidemia; (vi) smoking; (vii) hypertension; (viii) BMI; and (ix) coronary lesion location. Finally, we matched 34 culprit lesions and 30 nonculprit lesions in patients with PAD to 68 culprit lesions and 60 nonculprit lesions in patients without PAD (1 : 2 ratio).
Results:
In culprit lesions, PAD patients when compared with those without PAD had a higher prevalence of lipid-rich plaque (73.5 vs. 51.5%; P=0.033), higher lipid index (1744±1110 vs. 1246±656; P=0.043), calcification (79.4 vs. 58.8%; P=0.039), macrophage accumulation (70.6 vs. 48.5%; P=0.034), and cholesterol crystals (32.4 vs. 10.3%; P=0.006). In nonculprit lesions, PAD patients had a higher prevalence of calcification (76.7 vs. 55.0%; P=0.046), macrophage accumulation (63.3 vs. 38.3%; P=0.025), and cholesterol crystals (36.7 vs. 16.7%; P=0.034).
Conclusion:
Our study suggests greater coronary plaque vulnerability in both culprit and nonculprit lesions in patients with PAD. This observation underscores the need for more aggressive risk management in patients with combined PAD and coronary artery disease.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Peripheral Artery Disease I: Introduction
Atherosclerosis II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Tests
Peripheral Arterial Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Evaluation
Coronary Artery Disease I: Introduction
Coronary Artery Disease II: Pathophysiology
Atherosclerosis I: Introduction

