Review Article

Impact of Medical Therapy on Atheroma Volume Measured by Different Cardiovascular Imaging Modalities

Table 1

Summary of trials highlighting the nonhemodynamic effects of different classes of antihypertensive medications.

Study MedicationImaging modalityFollow-up (months)OutcomeResultP-value

PREVENT [9]825Amlodipine versus placeboQCA36Progression of coronary atherosclerosis (mm)−0.095 versus −0.084.38

PREVENT-substudy [9]377Amlodipine versus placeboB-mode ultrasound36CIMT (mm)−0.013 versus +0.033.007

CAMELOT-
NORMALIZE [13, 29]
274Amlodipine versus placeboIVUS24 PAV (%)−0.8; P = .12+0.3% (Favors Amlodipine) .59
CAMELOT-
NORMALIZE [13, 29]
274Enalapril versus placeboIVUS24 PAV (%)−0.5; P = .32

617B-mode ultrasound24 Carotid wall thickness (mm) 0.82 versus 0.81 0.58
Plaque score11.1 versus 11.7.93
Part-2 [15] Ramipril versus placebo48Carotid wall thickness (mm)0.83 versus 0.81.58
Plaque score12 versus 13.93

CAPARES [12]635Amlodipine versus PlaceboQCA4MLD (mm)−0.30 ± 0.45 versus −0.29 ± 0.45.84

SECURE [16]732Ramipril versus placeboB-mode ultrasound52 CIMT (mm/yr)0.0180 versus 0.0137
versus 0.0217
.033*

QUIET [17]450Quinapril versus placeboQCA36Stenosis progression (%)49 versus 47NS
MLD index−0.21 ± 0.03 versus −0.18 ± 0.03NS
in % diameter stenosis index+5.1 ± 1.0 versus 3.5 ± 1.0NS

394Enalapril versus placeboQCA47.8 mean diameter (mm)−0.11 versus −0.11NS
SCAT [18] minimum diameter (mm)−0.12 versus −0.12NS
% diameter stenosis (%)+2.80 versus +2.90NS

Waseda et. al. [21]64OlmesartanIVUS7Vessel volume index (mm2)9.9 ± 3.1 to 9.1 ± 2.7<.01

MORE [20].64Olmesartan versus atenololB-ultrasound24CIMTin plaques
>33.7  l ( l)
−11.5 ± 4.4 versus +0.6 ± 2.5.023

Nissen et. al. [14]1515Beta-blockers
versus No BB
IVUS18–24Change in atheroma volume/yr (mm3/yr)−2.4 ± 0.5 versus −0.4 ± 0.8.034

Ramipril 2.5 mg versus Ramipril 10 mg versus Placebo; P-value calculated across groups;
Baseline versus Followup;
intimal index (plaque area/vessel area);
difference between groups