|
Advertisement | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Papers In Press, published online ahead of print December 18, 2008 J. Lipid Res., doi:10.1194/jlr.R800099-JLR200
Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115
Corresponding Author: plibby{at}rics.bwh.harvard.edu
Clinicians have traditionally regarded the complications of atherosclerosis as a consequence of progressive arterial stenosis leading to critical narrowings that impede blood flow. Our contemporary understanding of the thrombotic complications of atherosclerosis has undergone a transformation based on a body of observations by pathologists and clinicians. In the late 1980s, clinicians had to confront the counterintuitive notion that plaques that cause acute myocardial infarction often do not produce high-grade stenoses. Observations from serial angiographic studies and on culprit lesions of acute myocardial infarction post-thrombolysis highlighted this apparent paradox. These contrarian clinical findings prompted cardiologists to consider more carefully the findings of generations of pathologists that plaques that cause fatal coronary thrombi often result from a physical disruption of the atheromatous plaque that may not indeed cause critical arterial narrowing. This convergence of clinical and pathological observations highlighted the importance of understanding the mechanisms of disruption of plaques that can precipitate thromboses.
Related Webpages:
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Advertisement | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||