Review Article

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

Table 3

Summary of trials highlighting the anti-atherosclerotic effects of antioxidants.

StudyNMedicationImaging modalityFollow-up (months)OutcomeResultP-value

SECURE [16]732Vitamin E versus PlaceboB-mode ultrasound52CIMT (mm/yr)0.0180 versus 0.0174NS

ASAP [57]520Vitamin E + CB-ultrasound72CIMT (%)−26.014

Fang et al. [59]40Vitamin E + C versus PlaceboIVUS12 average intimal index (%)+0.8 versus +8.008

VEAPS [56]353Vitamin E versus PlaceboB-ultrasound36 CIMT (mm/yr)+0.0040 ± 0.0007 versus +0.0023 ± 0.0007.08

Brown et al. [35]160Antioxidants versus PlaceboQCA36% diameter stenosis+1.8 ± 4.2 versus +3.9 ± 5.2NS
Simvastatin + Niacin + antioxidants versus placebo+0.7 ± 3.2 versus +3.9 ± 5.2<.005

Nunes et al. [60]54Probucol versus placeboIVUS6Intimal hyperplasia volume (mm3)40.3 ± 26.7 versus 44.8 ± 28.3.72
% luminal volume obstruction30.4 ± 14.5 versus 30.7 ± 17.2.86
QCARestenosis rate (%)19.4 versus 18.5.75

Tardif et al. [61]305Probucol versus placeboIVUS6Luminal area @ PCI (mm2)3.69 ± 2.69 versus 2.66 ± 1.58<.05
Succinobuccol (AGI-1067) versus placebo3.36 ± 2.12 versus 2.66 ± 1.58<.05

Tardif et al. [62]232280 mg Succinobuccol (AGI-1067) versus placeboIVUS12Plaque volume (mm3)−4.0; P =.001 versus −0.7; P = .12

Baseline versus Followup
intimal index (plaque area/vessel area)
difference between groups