“…The authors found, by coronary angiography (CAG), a 24.1% incidence of mismatch lesions (411/1706 lesions) and reported that the mismatch lesions were longer than non-mismatch lesions (22.1 + 6.6 mm vs 18.7 + 6.4 mm, respectively; P < .001) and that they also had a smaller minimum lumen diameter by CAG (0.66 + 0.44 vs 0.98 + 0.45, respectively; P < .001). 1 With IVUS, the mismatch group was reported to have a larger lumen diameter (3.65 + 0.52 mm vs 3.22 + 0.53 mm, respectively; P < .001), but with a lower plaque burden (41.4% + 9.4% vs 46.1% + 9.9%, respectively; P < .001), at the proximal reference segment of the lesion, whereas at the distal reference segment, there was a smaller lumen diameter (2.43 + 0.49 mm vs 2.99 + 0.59 mm, respectively; P < .001). 1 In turn, by IVUS, there was a larger plaque burden at the distal segment (43.3% + 10.4% vs 41.6% + 10.3%, P ¼ .004).…”