{"product_id":"understanding-a-new-3d-ultrasound-method-for-measuring-plaque-in-your-arteries","title":"Understanding a New 3D Ultrasound Method for Measuring Plaque in Your Arteries","description":"\u003cp\u003eCardiovascular disease remains a leading global health threat, and detecting artery-clogging plaque early is key to prevention. This study tested a new, more advanced 3D ultrasound technology that uses a smaller, more flexible probe to measure the amount of atherosclerotic plaque (hardening and narrowing of the arteries) in the carotid (neck) and femoral (leg) arteries. Researchers found that this new method is highly accurate—matching the \"gold standard\" microscopic analysis in the lab and matching older, bulkier ultrasound probes in human patients—while cutting the time needed to analyze images by nearly half. This could make measuring plaque burden easier and more practical in everyday clinical care, helping doctors better assess cardiovascular risk.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch1\u003eUnderstanding a New 3D Ultrasound Method for Measuring Plaque in Your Arteries\u003c\/h1\u003e\n\n\u003ch2\u003eTable of Contents\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#ddn-key-points\"\u003eKey Points\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#background\"\u003eBackground: Why Plaque Measurement Matters\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#why-new\"\u003eWhy This New Technology Was Needed\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#methods-lab\"\u003eStudy Methods, Part 1: The Laboratory (Ex Vivo) Validation\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#methods-clinical\"\u003eStudy Methods, Part 2: The Human (In Vivo) Clinical Test\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#findings-lab\"\u003eKey Findings: Laboratory Accuracy Against the Gold Standard\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#findings-clinical\"\u003eKey Findings: Clinical Feasibility and Agreement in Patients\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#findings-speed\"\u003eKey Findings: Speed and Efficiency Gains\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#implications\"\u003eClinical Implications: What This Means for Patients\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#limitations\"\u003eStudy Limitations: What This Study Couldn't Prove\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#recommendations\"\u003eRecommendations for Patients\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#ddn-faq\"\u003eFrequently Asked Questions\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#source\"\u003eSource Information\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\n\u003c!-- ddn:keypoints:start --\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"ddn-key-points\"\u003eKey Points\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eA newer 3D ultrasound probe measured plaque volume nearly identically to the older validated probe in 20 patients.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIn pig arteries, the new ultrasound matched microscope analysis closely, detecting plaques as small as 0.63 microliters.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe new analysis software cut image-reading time by about 46%, potentially improving clinical workflow.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUltrasound uses no ionizing radiation, making it suitable for repeated monitoring of plaque over time.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe study was small, used research software, and did not prove that measurements predict future heart events.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\u003c!-- ddn:keypoints:end --\u003e\n\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"background\"\u003eBackground: Why Plaque Measurement Matters\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAtherosclerosis is a disease in which fatty deposits, cholesterol, and other substances build up inside artery walls, forming what doctors call \"plaque.\" Over time, this plaque can grow, narrow the arteries, and eventually rupture—causing heart attacks, strokes, or poor circulation in the legs. Importantly, plaque starts forming silently, years or even decades before symptoms appear.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTraditionally, doctors have assessed cardiovascular risk using tools like blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and risk score calculators. But imaging-based biomarkers—pictures of the actual disease—can improve risk prediction significantly compared with these conventional clinical risk scales. The most well-known imaging biomarker is the coronary artery calcium score (CACS), measured by computed tomography (CT) scans. However, CT exposes patients to ionizing radiation, and it only detects plaque that has already calcified (hardened with calcium).\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUltrasound, by contrast, is completely free of radiation. It can also detect plaque at very early stages, before calcification occurs. The European Society of Cardiology guidelines now recommend ultrasound assessment of carotid and\/or femoral atherosclerosis burden for cardiovascular risk evaluation—reflecting the ability of a technique called 3-dimensional vascular ultrasound (3DVUS) to predict cardiovascular risk. In fact, 3DVUS has been shown to almost match the prognostic performance of coronary artery calcium scoring.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasuring plaque volume (the total amount of plaque) rather than just the thickness of the artery wall gives a more comprehensive picture of a person's overall disease burden.\u003c\/strong\u003e This is why accurate quantification is so important.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"why-new\"\u003eWhy This New Technology Was Needed\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSeveral 3D ultrasound approaches exist, but each has its limitations. The older \"mechanical-sweep\" probe (called the VL13-5) works by physically moving the ultrasound element inside the probe to sweep across the artery, generating a 3D image. It has been validated to produce accurate measurements of carotid and femoral plaque burden. However, this approach has functional drawbacks: the probe has a large footprint, meaning it's hard to place on angulated or curved body surfaces or in small fields of view. For example, examining arteries with tight curves or in patients with short, thick necks can be challenging.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA newer probe, the XL14-3, uses \"matrix\" technology and performs an \"electronic-sweep.\" Instead of physically moving parts, the probe electronically steers the ultrasound beam from a fixed position. This offers \u003cstrong\u003eimproved image quality\u003c\/strong\u003e and a \u003cstrong\u003esmaller footprint\u003c\/strong\u003e, making it easier to maneuver during an exam. A prior report confirmed excellent repeatability (interscan reproducibility) for carotid atherosclerosis assessment with this new probe. However, before this study, the accuracy of the 3D-matrix probe for actually quantifying plaque volume—especially for \u003cem\u003eearly, small plaques\u003c\/em\u003e (defined as smaller than 69 µL)—had not been tested. This is a critical gap because detecting small plaques is a cornerstone of primary prevention (preventing the first heart attack or stroke), and older 3D methods tended to underestimate them due to technical limitations.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"methods-lab\"\u003eStudy Methods, Part 1: The Laboratory (Ex Vivo) Validation\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo establish the accuracy of the new XL14-3 probe, researchers first conducted an experiment using animal tissue. They used carotid and femoral artery specimens from 13 pigs that had been genetically modified to overexpress a human mutant gene (PCSK9D374Y) and fed a cholesterol-rich diet. This pig model is valuable because the animals develop atherosclerotic lesions that closely resemble human plaques in both size and composition.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThree arteries were severely damaged during extraction, leaving \u003cstrong\u003e49 usable artery specimens (23 carotid and 26 femoral arteries)\u003c\/strong\u003e. These were embedded in agarose gel to create realistic \"phantoms\" (calibration models) for ultrasound testing. The pig carotid and femoral arteries are similar in size to human arteries, although in live pigs they sit too deep to scan easily—so the ex vivo approach was the right way to achieve precise validation.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eImage analysis with specialized software:\u003c\/strong\u003e The researchers used a Philips Epiq ultrasound system with the XL14-3 trans-ducer. For each phantom, they performed a 25° electronic sweep—a field of view large enough to capture all the plaque in the specimen. The acquired 3D images were then analyzed using a modified version of a previously validated software program called Volume Plaque Quantification (VPQ). This software displays the 3D volume as consecutive cross-sectional \"slices\" of the artery. On each slice, a reader traces the outer wall of the artery (red line), the inner wall (yellow line), and the boundaries of the plaque itself (green line). The software then calculates plaque volume as the 3D space between the outer wall and the plaque boundaries.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe gold standard comparison:\u003c\/strong\u003e After the ultrasound imaging was completed, the artery specimens were preserved in formalin, cut into thin cross-sectional slices, and analyzed under a microscope. Researchers used software called QuPath to measure the plaque area on each histological slide. Plaque area was defined as the difference between the inner media boundary and the plaque border. The plaque volume from histology was then calculated by multiplying each plaque area by the distance between slices—a meticulous \"planimetric\" technique. These histology measurements served as the true \"gold standard\" against which the 3D ultrasound volumes were compared.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"methods-clinical\"\u003eStudy Methods, Part 2: The Human (In Vivo) Clinical Test\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNext, the researchers tested the feasibility and accuracy of the new probe in real patients. They included \u003cstrong\u003e20 participants from the CNIC AtheroBrain: H2H (Head to Heart) study\u003c\/strong\u003e—a group of cardiovascular disease-free individuals with a mean age of 74.6 ± 4.45 years, of whom 40% were men. To avoid selection bias, they enrolled all consecutive patients attending their second study visit until they reached the planned sample size of 20.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEach participant was scanned in both the carotid and femoral territories using two probes:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003col\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eFirst, the new XL14-3 electronic-sweep 3D-matrix probe:\u003c\/strong\u003e The probe was aligned on a longitudinal view of the carotid artery centered at the carotid bulb, and on a longitudinal view of the femoral artery centered at the bifurcation. The scanned volume length was 4 cm in each territory.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eThen, the established VL13-5 mechanical-sweep probe:\u003c\/strong\u003e Using the previously validated methodology, the angular sweep was adjusted to 30° to create a pyramid-shaped 3D volume. The usable longitudinal coverage varied between 3 and 5 cm, depending on artery depth and how tortuous (curvy) the artery was.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ol\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eImages from the new XL14-3 probe were analyzed in two ways:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eMethod 1:\u003c\/strong\u003e With the established VPQ software (modified to work with XL14-3 data).\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eMethod 2:\u003c\/strong\u003e With a brand-new, unreleased research software called \"Carotid Model CM2020\" (version 123, Philips Research), which uses a fully 3D approach to plaque quantification.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThese were compared against \u003cstrong\u003eMethod 3\u003c\/strong\u003e: the previously validated combination of the VL13-5 probe with VPQ software.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePlaques were defined according to the internationally accepted \u003cstrong\u003eMannheim criteria\u003c\/strong\u003e as focal protrusions into the arterial lumen greater than 0.5 mm, more than 50% of the surrounding intima-media thickness, or an intima-media thickness greater than 1.5 mm. Plaque burden was quantified by measuring the total volume of all plaques seen in each territory.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFeasibility definitions:\u003c\/strong\u003e Researchers defined \"difficult arteries\" as those with features that might limit plaque acquisition—such as deep or tortuous (twisted) blood vessels that prevent all arterial segments from fitting into a single 3D volume. Patients with a \"difficult anatomy\" were those with short, narrow, or angulated necks or groin areas that made scanning maneuvers harder. Three specific plaque features that could limit analysis were also identified:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003e\"Low-echogenicity\" plaque:\u003c\/strong\u003e plaque that appears similar to blood on ultrasound, making it harder to see the boundary.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003e\"Calcification\":\u003c\/strong\u003e hard, calcium-containing plaque that blocks the ultrasound beam and creates acoustic shadowing.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003e\"Complex morphology\":\u003c\/strong\u003e plaque with a highly irregular surface or possible surface defects (ulcerations).\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor the CM2020 software analysis, an expert sonographer (a specialist in cardiovascular imaging) performed all readings. Repeat analyses for reproducibility were separated by at least 1 month. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility was assessed in 20 randomly selected plaque studies.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"findings-lab\"\u003eKey Findings: Laboratory Accuracy Against the Gold Standard\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe ex vivo ultrasound analysis of the pig artery specimens detected \u003cstrong\u003e19 atherosclerotic plaques, all of which were confirmed by histology\u003c\/strong\u003e. The mean plaque volume measured by histology was \u003cstrong\u003e14.11 ± 16.23 µL (range: 0.76 µL to 56.30 µL)\u003c\/strong\u003e, while the mean volume measured by the new 3D ultrasound was \u003cstrong\u003e15.01 ± 17.98 µL (range: 0.63 µL to 63.04 µL)\u003c\/strong\u003e. These numbers look close—and the statistical analysis confirmed they are.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003eintraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)\u003c\/strong\u003e was 0.992 (95% CI: 0.978–0.997), and the \u003cstrong\u003econcordance correlation coefficient (CCC)\u003c\/strong\u003e was 0.991 (95% CI: 0.986–0.995), both with P \u0026lt; 0.001. In plain language, these values indicate \u003cstrong\u003eexcellent, near-perfect agreement\u003c\/strong\u003e between the new ultrasound method and the gold-standard histological measurements.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe median absolute difference between the ultrasound and histology was just 0.36 µL (interquartile range: 0.23 µL to 1.09 µL), with a maximum difference of 6.74 µL. To put this in perspective, 1 µL is roughly the volume of a tiny grain of sand—so the measurement error is exceptionally small.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePassing-Bablok (PB) regression analysis—a robust statistical method for comparing two measurement techniques—detected a \u003cstrong\u003esmall systematic bias\u003c\/strong\u003e, with 3D ultrasound slightly overestimating plaque volume compared with histology. This tendency was more noticeable for larger plaques. The regression equation had an intercept of -0.53 (95% CI: -0.81 to -0.19) and a slope of 1.08 (95% CI: 1.04 to 1.12), with a test for linearity showing P = 0.66 (meaning the relationship was linear and consistent). This overestimation, while present, was so small that it did not meaningfully affect diagnostic accuracy.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"findings-clinical\"\u003eKey Findings: Clinical Feasibility and Agreement in Patients\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe clinical study was a resounding success in terms of feasibility. \u003cstrong\u003eAll 80 arterial territories from the 20 patients (100% of 3DVUS acquisitions) were successfully evaluated\u003c\/strong\u003e, with good image quality in the vast majority of studies. Importantly, \u003cstrong\u003eno images had to be excluded because of technically inadequate image quality\u003c\/strong\u003e—a strong testament to the robustness of the new technology.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBoth transducers (the new XL14-3 and the established VL13-5) detected atherosclerosis in the same \u003cstrong\u003e64 of 80 explored territories (80%): 36 carotid arteries and 28 femoral arteries\u003c\/strong\u003e. Plaque burden per territory ranged from 10 µL to 859 µL, covering both small and large plaques.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAgreement between the two probes:\u003c\/strong\u003e Mean plaque volume measured with the new XL14-3 matrix probe was 158.8 ± 176.9 µL (range: 10 µL to 859 µL), while the VL13-5 mechanical probe measured 160.8 ± 175.8 µL (range: 9 µL to 839 µL). The statistical agreement between the two probes was outstanding: \u003cstrong\u003eICC of 0.997 (95% CI: 0.995–0.998)\u003c\/strong\u003e, with identical values for both absolute agreement and consistency. Passing-Bablok regression showed an intercept of -2.00 (95% CI: -2.98 to 0.14) and slope of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.98 to 1.02)—essentially a perfect 1:1 relationship. Bland-Altman analysis confirmed this with a non-significant bias (P = 0.522), meaning neither probe systematically produced higher or lower readings.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAgreement between the two analysis software programs:\u003c\/strong\u003e The same 64 atherosclerotic territories were also detected with the new CM2020 software (method 2). Mean plaque volume with CM2020 was 158.7 ± 176.9 µL (range: 10.2 µL to 861.5 µL). Agreement between the VPQ software and the new CM2020 software was extraordinary: \u003cstrong\u003eICC of 0.999 (95% CI: 0.998–0.999)\u003c\/strong\u003e. Passing-Bablok regression showed an intercept of 0.37 (95% CI: -1.99 to 2.20) and slope of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.98 to 1.02), with Bland-Altman bias non-significant (P = 0.263). In short, the two software programs produced essentially interchangeable results.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReproducibility:\u003c\/strong\u003e Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility (how consistent results are when the same or different readers analyze the same images) for the CM2020 software was assessed in 20 randomly selected plaque studies using ICC analysis. The reproducibility was strong, supporting the reliability of the new software in real-world practice.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"findings-speed\"\u003eKey Findings: Speed and Efficiency Gains\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBeyond accuracy, clinicians care about efficiency. The study measured the time required to perform a complete vessel analysis with both the established VPQ software and the new CM2020 software. The results were striking:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eAnalysis with the new \u003cstrong\u003eCM2020 software took a mean of 394 ± 177 milliseconds\u003c\/strong\u003e per vessel.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eAnalysis with the established \u003cstrong\u003eVPQ software took a mean of 735 ± 554 milliseconds\u003c\/strong\u003e per vessel.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eThis difference was statistically significant (P \u0026lt; 0.001).\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eThe mean time reduction was \u003cstrong\u003e46 ± 21%\u003c\/strong\u003e—nearly half the analysis time.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis speed advantage means that in clinical practice, the new software could allow a busy sonographer or cardiologist to evaluate more patients in less time, potentially improving access to plaque quantification.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"implications\"\u003eClinical Implications: What This Means for Patients\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study's findings have several patient-relevant implications.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFirst, the new technology is at least as good as the old one.\u003c\/strong\u003e For patients, the most important message is that the new XL14-3 probe and CM2020 software produce measurements essentially identical to those of the previously validated, older technology. The ICC values of 0.997 and 0.999 represent near-perfect agreement—far above the threshold typically considered \"excellent\" in medical research (generally ICC \u0026gt; 0.90).\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSecond, it detects both small and large plaques reliably.\u003c\/strong\u003e The clinical range of plaque volumes measured (10 µL to 859 µL, and in the lab, down to 0.63 µL) demonstrates that the new method can capture early-stage plaques that older methods tended to miss. Early detection of small plaques is exactly what's needed to identify people at risk before a first cardiovascular event.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThird, the exam is more practical.\u003c\/strong\u003e The smaller footprint of the new probe makes it easier to use in everyday clinical situations—on patients with curved arteries, short necks, or difficult body habitus. This may reduce failed or incomplete exams.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFourth, it may improve workflow.\u003c\/strong\u003e The 46% reduction in analysis time could translate into faster appointments and perhaps more widespread adoption of plaque burden measurement as a routine part of cardiovascular risk assessment.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFinally, it's radiation-free.\u003c\/strong\u003e Like all ultrasound, this technique involves no ionizing radiation, distinguishing it from CT-based calcium scoring. For patients who need repeated monitoring over time (to see if plaque is growing or regressing in response to statins or lifestyle changes), the ability to use a safe, repeatable test is a distinct advantage.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"limitations\"\u003eStudy Limitations: What This Study Couldn't Prove\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs with any study, there are important limitations to acknowledge.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSmall sample size:\u003c\/strong\u003e The clinical study included only 20 patients. While the statistical results were overwhelmingly strong and consistent, larger studies would be needed to confirm these findings across more diverse populations—including patients with different body types, ages, and ethnic backgrounds.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLaboratory vs. real-life conditions:\u003c\/strong\u003e The ex vivo validation used pig arteries embedded in agarose, which provides a controlled environment. In real patients, tissues are more complex, and factors like breathing, heartbeat, and patient movement can affect image quality. The fact that all 80 territories were successfully scanned in humans is reassuring, but this was a small, carefully performed study by an expert sonographer.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSlight overestimation of larger plaques:\u003c\/strong\u003e The study found that 3D ultrasound tended to slightly overestimate plaque volume compared with histology, especially for larger plaques. The magnitude was small (median absolute difference 0.36 µL), but it's worth remembering that the measurement isn't perfect—it's very good, not exact.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe software used in the study:\u003c\/strong\u003e The version of VPQ software used for the ex vivo part was modified (not commercially available), and CM2020 was an unreleased research version. The commercially available product may differ somewhat from what was tested. Additionally, all analyses were performed by a single expert sonographer. While intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility was tested for CM2020, the broader generalizability to less experienced readers isn't established.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClinical outcomes weren't measured:\u003c\/strong\u003e This was a validation study—it proved the technology can measure plaque accurately, but it did not follow patients over time to see whether these measurements predict heart attacks, strokes, or deaths. Earlier studies with the older technique have demonstrated prognostic value, and this new method will need similar long-term outcome studies.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\/author relationships:\u003c\/strong\u003e Several authors are employees of Philips Healthcare, the company that makes both the ultrasound probes and the software evaluated in the study. This represents a potential conflict of interest that should be kept in mind when interpreting the results.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"recommendations\"\u003eRecommendations for Patients\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhat should you, as a patient, take away from this research? Here are some practical points:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003col\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eKnow your numbers.\u003c\/strong\u003e If you have risk factors for cardiovascular disease (high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, smoking, obesity, or a family history of early heart disease), talk to your doctor about whether measuring plaque burden in your carotid or femoral arteries could help refine your risk assessment.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eUltrasound is a safe, repeatable choice.\u003c\/strong\u003e Unlike CT calcium scoring, ultrasound exposes you to no radiation. This makes it a good option for people who need serial monitoring over time to track whether their plaque is stable, growing, or shrinking in response to treatment.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eLifestyle and medication still matter most.\u003c\/strong\u003e Plaque measurement is a diagnostic tool, not a treatment. Regardless of what your plaque volume shows, the cornerstone of prevention remains the same: a heart-healthy diet, regular physical activity, not smoking, controlling blood pressure and cholesterol, and taking prescribed medications (such as statins) as directed.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eThe new technology is promising, but ask about availability.\u003c\/strong\u003e The XL14-3 probe and CM2020 software are relatively new. If a test like this is offered at a major cardiovascular center near you, you can be confident that the underlying technology has now been rigorously validated against gold-standard histology.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eTreat uncertainty with a grain of salt.\u003c\/strong\u003e No imaging test is perfect. The measurements from this method are extremely accurate (99%+ agreement with the gold standard), but they're a tool to inform clinical judgment—not an oracle. Always discuss results with your physician in the context of your overall health picture.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ol\u003e\n\n\u003c!-- ddn:faq:start --\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"ddn-faq\"\u003eFrequently Asked Questions\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eHow accurate is the new 3D ultrasound compared to older methods?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 20 patients, measurements from the new probe were nearly identical to the older, validated probe, with a correlation of 0.997. Compared to microscope analysis of pig arteries, the agreement was also excellent (0.992). The average difference was just 0.36 microliters, about the size of a tiny grain of sand.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eDoes this ultrasound test use radiation?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo. Like all ultrasound, this technique uses no ionizing radiation. That makes it a safe option for repeated imaging to monitor whether plaque is growing or shrinking over time, unlike CT calcium scoring which uses radiation and only detects calcified plaque.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWho might benefit from having their plaque volume measured?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePeople with cardiovascular risk factors—such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, smoking, obesity, or a family history of early heart disease—might benefit. Your doctor can help decide if measuring plaque in your carotid or femoral arteries could refine your risk assessment. Ultrasound is radiation-free and repeatable.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWhat were the limitations of this study?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOnly 20 patients took part, so results may not apply to everyone. The lab validation used pig arteries, not live human tissue. The software was an unreleased research version, and the lead researchers included employees of the ultrasound company. Also, the study did not follow patients to see if measurements predict future heart attacks or strokes.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eIf I get a plaque measurement, what should I do with the result?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePlaque measurement is a diagnostic tool, not a treatment. Discuss the result with your doctor in the context of your overall health. Regardless of the number, prevention still centers on a heart-healthy diet, regular activity, not smoking, controlling blood pressure and cholesterol, and taking prescribed medications as directed.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eShould I seek a second opinion for carotid or femoral artery plaque volume measured by the new 3D ultrasound method?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIf your doctor recommends measuring plaque in your carotid or femoral arteries with 3D ultrasound, or if you already have a plaque volume result, a second opinion can help confirm the imaging findings and ensure your risk assessment is accurate. The new 3D ultrasound method has shown near-perfect agreement with microscopic analysis and older validated probes, so disagreements between readers are unlikely but possible. A second opinion is especially valuable if you have small plaques, difficult anatomy, or if the recommended treatment (such as statins) depends heavily on the exact plaque volume. Diagnostic Detectives Network provides independent expert second opinions.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003c!-- ddn:faq:end --\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"source\"\u003eSource Information\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOriginal article title:\u003c\/strong\u003e 3-Dimensional VolumetricUltrasound Method for AccurateQuantification of AtheroscleroticPlaque Volume\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors:\u003c\/strong\u003e Beatriz López-Melgar, MD, PhD; Virginia Mass, BSc; Paula Nogales, MSc; Javier Sánchez-González, PhD; Robert Entrekin, MSc; Antoine Collet-Billon, MSc; Xavier Rossello, MD, PhD; Leticia Fernández-Friera, MD, PhD; Antonio Fernández-Ortiz, MD, PhD; Javier Sanz, MD; Jacob F. Bentzon, PhD; Héctor Bueno, MD, PhD; Borja Ibáñez, MD, PhD; Valentín Fuster, MD, PhD\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eJournal:\u003c\/strong\u003e JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, Volume 15, No. 6, June 2022, pages 1124–1135\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublication details:\u003c\/strong\u003e DOI: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jcmg.2022.01.005. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis patient-friendly article is based on the peer-reviewed research above. It has been written for a general audience and does not constitute medical advice; always consult a healthcare professional about your individual health needs.\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"DiagnosticDetectives.Com","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":47494439698588,"sku":null,"price":0.0,"currency_code":"KRW","in_stock":true}],"url":"https:\/\/diagnosticdetectives.kr\/products\/understanding-a-new-3d-ultrasound-method-for-measuring-plaque-in-your-arteries","provider":"DiagnosticDetectives.Com","version":"1.0","type":"link"}