Comparison of two mechanical ultrasound devices with and without echogenic contrast dye

To evaluate the impact and limitations of intracoronary ultrasound, 64 segments of 13 isolated coronary arteries were examined and 2 mechanical devices (device A, 30 MHz 5Fr [CVIS] and device B, 20 MHz 4.8Fr [Diasonics/Boston Scientific] were compared with the corresponding histologic specimens. Luminal dimensions were assessed with and without echogenic contrast dye (Laevovist, Schering AG, Germany). After application of contrast dye, correlation of luminal area between histology and ultrasound was improved from r = 0.62 to r = 0.77 (device B; p < 0.05) and from r = 0.82 to r = 0.88 (device A; p = NS). Low accuracy of lumen measurements in segments < 2.5 mm could be improved by application of contrast dye. The number of quadrants in which wall thickness measurements were impossible was significantly higher for device B (n = 56; 22%) than for device A (n = 28; 11%); p < 0.01. This may be due to the different ringdown diameters of both systems (B, 2.6 mm; A, 2.0 mm; p < 0.0001). In assessing wall thickness only in segments of > 2.5 mm, a reliable correlation between ultrasound and histology was found (A, r = 0.80; B, r = 0.60). Sensitivity of plaque (n = 51) detection was lower for device B (63%) than for device A (82%, p < 0.05), and measurements correlated with histology only for device A. There are considerable differences in the accuracy of ultrasound measurements between mechanical systems. Nevertheless, additional application of contrast dye can improve accuracy of luminal measurements, especially in smaller vessels.