ライフサイエンスコーパス: calcified plaque

1 abetes mellitus mainly led to an increase in calcified plaque.

2 ndent association with annual progression of calcified plaque.

3 o human peripheral arteries with substantial calcified plaque.

4 Only 1 ACS occurred in the absence of calcified plaque.

5 traclass correlation coefficients, >0.99) of calcified plaque.

6 ied plaque was noted or EBT- if there was no calcified plaque.

7 w-risk, quiescent, eccentric, nonobstructive calcified plaque.

8 with fewer mixed plaques and more often only calcified plaques.

9 scrimination between soft, intermediate, and calcified plaques.

10 (n = 10), mild (n = 10), or severe (n = 10) calcified plaques.

11 timated total plaque volume (-9.4 mm(3)) and calcified plaque (-11.4 mm(3)) and overestimated for non

12 , which comprised mostly fibrous (62.7%) and calcified plaque (23.6%), showed increasingly prominent

13 ; 95% CI, 0.15-0.85) and more often had only calcified plaques (38% versus 16%; ORadjusted=3.57; 95%

14 American patients had a lower prevalence of calcified plaque (39 [26%] vs 68 [45%] white patients, P

15 versus 54.6+/-19.2%; P<0.001) and partially calcified plaques (44.3+/-19.6 versus 54.9+/-20.0%; P<0.

16 Cluster 4 (n = 300), which comprised mostly calcified plaque (58.7%), demonstrated the greatest tota

17 The diagnostic accuracy of CT to detect calcified plaque (83% versus 92%), necrotic core (80% ve

18 Attenuated plaques evolved into calcified plaques after stent implantation.

19 aled fewer mixed plaques and more often only calcified plaques among athletes, suggesting a more beni

20 LDL-C is associated with higher risk of non-calcified plaque and with higher relative risk of future

21 DL-C) is associated with the presence of non-calcified plaques and future cardiovascular events in in

22 vels were associated with lower incidence of calcified plaques and plaques without high-risk features

23 e assessed the characteristics of individual calcified plaques and their relationship to other parame

24 92% and 88% for any plaque, 95% and 91% for calcified plaque, and 91% and 89% for noncalcified plaqu

25 cified plaque, a mixture of noncalcified and calcified plaque, and calcified plaque were significantl

26 t or supplements with any of our measures of calcified plaque, and no greater mortality risk was obse

27 spectively), and specifically with increased calcified plaques (aOR, 1.07 [1.00 to 1.15] per 10%; aOR

28 is, macrophage area, necrotic core area, and calcified plaque area was evaluated by using recursive p

29 ile mixed plaque at coronary CT angiography, calcified plaque at intravascular US, and lipid-rich pla

30 Calcified plaque at the proximal stent edge (relative ri

31 for uptake was significantly associated with calcified plaque burden (P < 0.0001) and cardiovascular

32 Tracer uptake was compared with calcified plaque burden and cardiovascular risk factors.

33 Younger diabetic individuals appear to have calcified plaque burden comparable to that of older indi

34 coronary plaque characteristics and overall calcified plaque burden confer an increased risk of coro

35 Median calcified plaque burden was 3.7% in patients with MACE v

36 women 50 to 59 years old at enrollment, the calcified-plaque burden in the coronary arteries after t

37 he number of proximal segments with mixed or calcified plaques (C-index 0.64, p < 0.0001) and the num

38 The presence and severity of coronary artery calcified plaque (CAC) differs markedly between individu

39 l atherosclerosis imaging of coronary artery calcified plaque (CAC) to the primary prevention of coro

40 d computed tomography measurement of carotid calcified plaque (CarCP) and coronary calcified plaque (

41 ied plaque (CCP) and with or without carotid calcified plaque (CarCP) measured by electrocardiogram-g

42 est for an association among coronary artery calcified plaque, carotid artery calcified plaque, carot

43 nary artery calcified plaque, carotid artery calcified plaque, carotid IMT, and ACR while adjusting f

44 subjects with multiple (> or =3) individual calcified plaques, CC was heterogeneous within individua

45 are with or without the presence of coronary calcified plaque (CCP) and with or without carotid calci

46 posite, although nonsignificant, increase in calcified plaque (%change calcified volume/log2-fold cha

47 raphy showed a better agreement with ICA for calcified plaques compared with SR coronary CT angiograp

48 Both spatial distribution and amount of calcified plaque contribute to risk for CHD.

49 arotid calcified plaque (CarCP) and coronary calcified plaque (CorCP).

50 Characteristics of individual calcified plaques, especially calcium concentration (CC)

51 may reflect that the pathological process of calcified plaque formation and progression is the same i

52 Calcified plaque frequency was reduced in PLWH (OR, 0.6;

53 f coronary artery calcium, mixed plaque, and calcified plaque; higher CCL2 levels were associated wit

54 plaque (HR, 58.06; P = .005) or exclusively calcified plaque (HR, 32.94; P = .02).

55 orded in 188 (47%), any plaque in 214 (53%), calcified plaque in 151 (38%), and noncalcified/mixed pl

56 n after CAS, particularly in patients with a calcified plaque in the carotid bulb, but is easily trea

57 Albuminuria is strongly associated with calcified plaque in the coronary and carotid arteries in

58 Calcified plaque in the coronary arteries is a marker fo

59 supplements and measures of subclinical CVD (calcified plaque in the coronary artery, carotid artery,

60 e standard deviation of CC of all individual calcified plaques in a subject.

61 ified volume, and mineral mass of individual calcified plaques in each subject.

62 of HRM (defined as noncalcified or partially calcified plaques) in the LMCA.

63 The CC of individual calcified plaques is independent of age and sex but hete

64 These data illustrate that calcified plaque limited intravascular drug delivery, an

65 Accurate quantification of calcium in each calcified plaque may require that the threshold be set i

66 respecified endpoints were non-calcified and calcified plaque measures and high risk plaque features

67 r calcified (<= 0.25 mm(2)) (N = 12) and non-calcified plaques (N = 4).

68 alyzed separately: CAC score >0, any plaque, calcified plaque, noncalcified/mixed plaque, segment inv

69 included adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for non-calcified plaque on CCTA and adjusted hazard ratios (aHR

70 e, a proximal segment with either a mixed or calcified plaque or a stenosis >50% is equivalent to a 5

71 6 to 3.26], p < 0.0001) or the presence of a calcified plaque (OR 1.89 [range 1.25 to 2.84], p < 0.00

72 ) and of any plaque; noncalcified, mixed, or calcified plaque; or stenosis on coronary CT angiography

73 atus and noncalcified plaque volume, but not calcified plaque (P = .83).

74 s, age was the only independent predictor of calcified plaque (p = 0.02) and remodeling (p = 0.005).

75 exercise was associated with greater CAC and calcified plaque progression, whereas vigorous intensity

76 -related risk of CHD (CASR), coronary artery calcified plaque (PTPRN2), and kidney function (CDH23, H

77 stprocessing techniques enhanced accuracy of calcified plaque quantification by reducing effects of t

78 1, P=0.002; fibrous plaque: r=0.54, P<0.001; calcified plaque: r=0.59, P<0.001; total plaque: r=0.62,

79 re negatively associated with any plaque and calcified plaque, respectively.

80 0.92), noncalcified plaque (rho = 0.91), and calcified plaque (rho = 0.87).

81 For calcified plaque, sensitivity was 94% (33 of 36) and spe

82 Comparison of calcified plaque sizes determined with OCT with those de

83 However, statin therapy reduced non-calcified plaque volume and high-risk coronary plaque fe

84 reas coronary artery calcification score and calcified plaque volume are more determined by genetics.

85 rtery calcification) score, noncalcified and calcified plaque volumes by coronary computed tomography

86 Calcified plaque volumes did not differ significantly be

87 hile coronary artery calcification score and calcified plaque volumes had a relatively strong genetic

88 The prevalence of non-calcified plaque was 100%, 62%, and 77%, respectively, a

89 and 77%, respectively, and the prevalence of calcified plaque was 71%, 92%, and 85%, respectively, in

90 was good, and agreement for the presence of calcified plaque was high (kappa = 0.92, MESA; kappa = 0

91 The area of calcified plaque was measured at histopathologic examina

92 Calcified plaque was negatively associated with efaviren

93 es were higher in patients with CAV, whereas calcified plaque was not (median 0.0 vs 0.0, P = .510).

94 and HDLC > or =35 mg/dl; and 2) EBT+ if any calcified plaque was noted or EBT- if there was no calci

95 therosclerosis was regarded as definite if a calcified plaque was seen in the wall of an artery and p

96 correction factor was applied, the volume of calcified plaque was statistically better quantified wit

97 mmol/L higher LDL-C, the overall aOR for non-calcified plaques was 1.21 [95% confidence interval (CI)

98 The prevalence of non-calcified plaques was 11%.

99 CC of individual calcified plaques was independent of subject age (P=0.76

100 Coronary and carotid artery calcified plaque were measured using fast-gated helical

101 re of noncalcified and calcified plaque, and calcified plaque were significantly higher among men wit

102 s prepared, and materials mimicking soft and calcified plaques were added to simulate stenosed corona

103 Negative remodeling and calcified plaque with rare plaque ruptured were common i

104 nel-volume CT by comparing measured areas of calcified plaque with respect to the reference standard