Chronic Wound Pathophysiology, Advanced Diagnostic Modalities, and Therapeutic Strategies: The Role of Intravascular Ultrasound (IVUS) and Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) in Prognostic Assessment
Main Article Content
Abstract
Chronic wounds represent a complex and multifactorial medical challenge, often associated with underlying vascular insufficiency, metabolic disorders, or persistent inflammatory states. The management of these lesions necessitates a comprehensive diagnostic approach to evaluate tissue perfusion, microvascular integrity, and structural abnormalities. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) have emerged as pivotal imaging modalities in the assessment of chronic wounds, providing high-resolution, cross-sectional visualization of vascular and dermal pathology. This article explores the etiopathogenesis of chronic wounds, discusses contemporary treatment paradigms, and evaluates the prognostic implications of IVUS and OCT in guiding therapeutic decision-making. By integrating advanced imaging techniques with evidence-based wound care protocols, clinicians can optimize healing outcomes and mitigate long-term complications in high-risk patient populations.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
I. Zhang H, Mu L, Hu S, et al Comparison of physician visual assessment with quantitative coronary angiography in assessment of stenosis severity in China. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178:239–247.
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.7821
II. Glagov S, Weisenberg E, Zarins CK, et al Compensatory enlargement of human atherosclerotic coronary arteries. N Engl J Med. 1987;316:1371–1375.
doi: 10.1056/NEJM198705283162204.
III. Tonino PA, Fearon WF, De Bruyne B, et al Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:2816–2821. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.11.096.
IV. De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Kalesan B, et al Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:991–1001.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1205361.
V. Buccheri S, Franchina G, Romano S, et al Clinical outcomes following intravascular imaging-guided versus coronary angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation: a systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis of 31 studies and 17, 882 patients. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10:2488–2498.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.08.051.
VI. Smilowitz NR, Mohananey D, Razzouk L, et al Impact and trends of intravascular imaging in diagnostic coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention in inpatients in the United States. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;92:E410–E415. doi: 10.1002/ccd.27673.
VII. Edler I, Hertz CH The use of ultrasonic reflectoscope for the continuous recording of the movements of heart walls. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2004;24:118–136.
doi: 10.1111/j.1475-097X.2004.00539.x.
VIII. 8.Mintz GS, Nissen SE, Anderson WD, et al American College of Cardiology clinical expert consensus document on standards for acquisition, measurement and reporting of Intravascular Ultrasound Studies (IVUS). A report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37:1478–1492.
doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(01)01175-5.
IX. Bom N, Carlier SG, van der Steen AF, Lancée CT. Intravascular scanners. Ultrasound Med Biol 2000; 26 Suppl 1: S6-S9.
X. Hibi K, Takagi A, Zhang X, et al Feasibility of a novel blood noise reduction algorithm to enhance reproducibility of ultra-high-frequency intravascular ultrasound images. Circulation. 2000;102:1657–1663.
doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.102.14.1657.
XI. Huang D, Swanson EA, Lin CP, et al Optical coherence tomography. Science. 1991;254:1178–1181. doi: 10.1126/science.1957169.
XII. Terashima M, Kaneda H, Suzuki T The role of optical coherence tomography in coronary intervention. Korean J Intern Med. 2012;27:1–12. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2012.27.1
XIII. Swanson EA, Izatt JA, Hee MR, et al In vivo retinal imaging by optical coherence tomography. Opt Lett. 1993;18:1864–1866. doi: 10.1364/OL.18.001864.
XIV. 14.Barlis P, Schmitt JM Current and future developments in intracoronary optical coherence tomography imaging. EuroIntervention. 2009;4:529–533. doi:10.4244/EIJV4I4A89.
XV. Brezinski M, Saunders K, Jesser C, et al Index matching to improve optical coherence tomography imaging through blood. Circulation.
;103:1999–2003.
doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.103.15.1999.
XVI. Takarada S, Imanishi T, Liu Y, et al Advantage of next-generation frequency-domain optical coherence tomography compared with conventional time-domain system in the assessment of coronary lesion. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;75:202–206. doi: 10.1002/ccd.22273
XVII. 17.Jang IK, Bouma BE, Kang DH, et al Visualization of coronary atherosclerotic plaques in patients using optical coherence tomography: comparison with intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39:604–609.
doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(01)01799-5.