The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Process of Progression of Coronary Artery Lesions From Mild or Moderate Stenosis to Moderate or Severe Stenosis: A Study Based on Four Serial Coronary Arteriograms per Year
Open accessAbstract
Background —The process of progression in coronary artery disease is unknown. Methods and Results —The subjects were 36 patients with 36 objective vessels with clinically significant progression of coronary artery disease (≥15% per year) in whom 4 serial coronary arteriograms (CAGs) were performed at intervals of ≈4 months in a 1-year period. The degree of progression of percent stenosis between each of 2 serial CAGs was classified as marked (M: ≥15%), slight (S: 5% to 14%), and no progression (N: <5%). From the pattern of progression, the 36 vessels were classified as 14 type 1 vessels with marked progression (N→N→M in 13 vessels and S→S→M in 1 vessel) and 22 type 2 vessels without marked progression (S→S→S in 18 vessels, N→S→S in 4). Percent stenosis at the first, second, third, and final CAGs was 44±14%, 46±13%, 46±13%, and 88±10% ( P <0.05 versus first CAG) in type 1 vessels and 44±11%, 50±9%, 59±9%, and 67±9% in type 2 vessels ( P <0.05 for second, third, and final CAGs versus first CAG). Type 1 vessels featured the sudden appearance of severe stenosis due to marked progression, angina pectoris, or myocardial infarction (71%) and Ambrose type II eccentric lesions indicating plaque rupture or thrombi (57%). Type 2 vessels featured continuous slight progression of stenosis with smooth vessel walls; angina pectoris (14%) occurred when the percent stenosis reached a severe level. An increase in serum C-reactive protein was observed only in the type 2 vessel group, which suggests a relation between continuous slight progression and inflammatory change. Conclusions —Two types of stenosis progression provide a new insight into the mechanism of coronary artery disease.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Inflammation in atherosclerosis
Libby, P. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01323 · Cited by 8,315
Pathophysiology of coronary artery disease
Libby, P., & Theroux, P. (2005) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.105.537878 · Cited by 1,965
Arterial thrombosis—insidious, unpredictable and deadly
Jackson, S. P. (2011) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/nm.2515 · Cited by 685
The Myth of the “Vulnerable Plaque”
Arbab-Zadeh, A., & Fuster, V. (2015) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.11.041 · Cited by 434
The role of shear stress in the generation of rupture-prone vulnerable plaques
Slager, C., Wentzel, J., Gijsen, F., Schuurbiers, J., van der Wal, A., van der Steen, A., & Serruys, P. (2005) · Nature Clinical Practice Cardiovascular Medicine · doi:10.1038/ncpcardio0274 · Cited by 342
Metadata
- Authors
- Yokoya, K., Takatsu, H., Suzuki, T., Hosokawa, H., Ojio, S., Matsubara, T., Tanaka, T., Watanabe, S., Morita, N., Nishigaki, K., Takemura, G., Noda, T., Minatoguchi, S., & Fujiwara, H.
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 1999-08-31
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 903-909
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W2152409347
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Process of Progression of Coronary Artery Lesions From Mild or Moderate Stenosis to Moderate or Severe Stenosis: A Study Based on Four Serial Coronary Arteriograms per Year. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.100.9.903
- The paper
- Yokoya, K., Takatsu, H., Suzuki, T., Hosokawa, H., Ojio, S., Matsubara, T., Tanaka, T., Watanabe, S., Morita, N., Nishigaki, K., Takemura, G., Noda, T., Minatoguchi, S., & Fujiwara, H. (1999). Process of Progression of Coronary Artery Lesions From Mild or Moderate Stenosis to Moderate or Severe Stenosis: A Study Based on Four Serial Coronary Arteriograms per Year. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.100.9.903
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.