1 cted, even with intracoronary ultrasound and angioscopy.

2                                              Angioscopy allows direct visualization of the coronary a

3                         In 26 patients, both angioscopy and intravascular ultrasound were performed i

4 llograft vasculopathy in vivo using coronary angioscopy as an adjunct to intravascular ultrasound, an

5 recipients with intravascular ultrasound and angioscopy at the time of their annual angiogram, and we

6 clinical importance of thrombi detectable by angioscopy but not by angiography is not known.

7                                     Coronary angioscopy can evaluate intimal surface morphology by di

8           We investigated whether the use of angioscopy can improve prediction of early adverse outco

9                                              Angioscopy clearly identifies thrombus.

10 phy has been shown to be less sensitive than angioscopy for detecting subtle details of intracoronary

11                                      Virtual angioscopy helped demonstrate morphologic aspects of ste

12 itative or quantitative variables present on angioscopy, intravascular ultrasound imaging or quantita

13 s ability to detect superficial lipid pools, angioscopy may be valuable for the detection of vulnerab

14 and complex lesions on angiography underwent angioscopy (n = 40) and intravascular ultrasound imaging

15   Plaque rupture or thrombus on preprocedure angioscopy or angioscopic thrombus after intervention we

16 ischemia were plaque rupture on preprocedure angioscopy (p < 0.05, odds ratio [OR] 10.15) and angiosc

17 ere identified in 74 target lesions (61%) by angioscopy versus only 24 (20%) by angiography.

18                        Percutaneous coronary angioscopy was performed in 122 patients undergoing conv

19                                              Angioscopy was superior to angiography for prediction of

20 tics of the plaque that were identifiable by angioscopy was superior to that estimated by the use of