Table 1

Clinically available techniques for imaging features of plaque vulnerability

Imaging techniqueClinical feasibility (cost, availability, ease of use, etc)Key imaging targetsComments
Non-invasive
 Ultrasound+++cIMTCarotid imaging only.
Conflicting evidence for use as surrogate end point in drug trials
 CT+++Calcification (macroscopic)
Plaque volume/composition
Remodelling
Widely available
 MRI++Plaque volume/composition
Neovascularisation and IPH
Inflammation (USPIO)
Technically challenging to image coronary plaque
 PET+Inflammation (18F-FDG)
Microcalcification (18F-NaF)
Limited availability
Short T1/2 of tracers necessitates close proximity of cyclotron
Invasive
 Coronary angiography+++Stenosis severityEssential prerequisite to other invasive imaging tools
Can be combined with FFR for assessing coronary physiology
 IVUS++Plaque volume/composition
Positive remodelling
Calcification (macroscopic)
Prospective studies have demonstrated predictive potential
 OCT++Fibrous cap thickness
Plaque rupture
Thrombus
Can differentiate plaque rupture from erosion
 NIRS+Lipid corePredictive of periprocedural MI
Prospective validation study underway
  • cIMT, carotid intima-media thickness; 18F-FDG, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose; 18F-NaF, 18F-sodium fluoride; FFR, fractional flow reserve; IPH, intraplaque haemorrhage; IVUS, intravascular ultrasound; MI, myocardial infarction; NIRS, near-infrared spectroscopy; OCT, optical coherence tomography; PET, positron emission tomography; T1/2, half-life; USPIO, ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide.