Intima-media thickness at the near or far wall of the common carotid artery in cardiovascular risk assessment.

European heart journal open Pub Date : 2023-09-20 eCollection Date: 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1093/ehjopen/oead089
Lisa Seekircher, Lena Tschiderer, Lars Lind, Maya S Safarova, Maryam Kavousi, M Arfan Ikram, Eva Lonn, Salim Yusuf, Diederick E Grobbee, John J P Kastelein, Frank L J Visseren, Matthew Walters, Jesse Dawson, Peter Higgins, Stefan Agewall, Alberico Catapano, Eric de Groot, Mark A Espeland, Gerhard Klingenschmid, Dianna Magliano, Michael H Olsen, David Preiss, Dirk Sander, Michael Skilton, Dorota A Zozulińska-Ziółkiewicz, Muriel P C Grooteman, Peter J Blankestijn, Kazuo Kitagawa, Shuhei Okazaki, Maria V Manzi, Costantino Mancusi, Raffaele Izzo, Moise Desvarieux, Tatjana Rundek, Hertzel C Gerstein, Michiel L Bots, Michael J Sweeting, Matthias W Lorenz, Peter Willeit
{"title":"Intima-media thickness at the near or far wall of the common carotid artery in cardiovascular risk assessment.","authors":"Lisa Seekircher,&nbsp;Lena Tschiderer,&nbsp;Lars Lind,&nbsp;Maya S Safarova,&nbsp;Maryam Kavousi,&nbsp;M Arfan Ikram,&nbsp;Eva Lonn,&nbsp;Salim Yusuf,&nbsp;Diederick E Grobbee,&nbsp;John J P Kastelein,&nbsp;Frank L J Visseren,&nbsp;Matthew Walters,&nbsp;Jesse Dawson,&nbsp;Peter Higgins,&nbsp;Stefan Agewall,&nbsp;Alberico Catapano,&nbsp;Eric de Groot,&nbsp;Mark A Espeland,&nbsp;Gerhard Klingenschmid,&nbsp;Dianna Magliano,&nbsp;Michael H Olsen,&nbsp;David Preiss,&nbsp;Dirk Sander,&nbsp;Michael Skilton,&nbsp;Dorota A Zozulińska-Ziółkiewicz,&nbsp;Muriel P C Grooteman,&nbsp;Peter J Blankestijn,&nbsp;Kazuo Kitagawa,&nbsp;Shuhei Okazaki,&nbsp;Maria V Manzi,&nbsp;Costantino Mancusi,&nbsp;Raffaele Izzo,&nbsp;Moise Desvarieux,&nbsp;Tatjana Rundek,&nbsp;Hertzel C Gerstein,&nbsp;Michiel L Bots,&nbsp;Michael J Sweeting,&nbsp;Matthias W Lorenz,&nbsp;Peter Willeit","doi":"10.1093/ehjopen/oead089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Current guidelines recommend measuring carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) at the far wall of the common carotid artery (CCA). We aimed to precisely quantify associations of near vs. far wall CCA-IMT with the risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD, defined as coronary heart disease or stroke) and their added predictive values.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>We analysed individual records of 41 941 participants from 16 prospective studies in the Proof-ATHERO consortium {mean age 61 years [standard deviation (SD) = 11]; 53% female; 16% prior CVD}. Mean baseline values of near and far wall CCA-IMT were 0.83 (SD = 0.28) and 0.82 (SD = 0.27) mm, differed by a mean of 0.02 mm (95% limits of agreement: -0.40 to 0.43), and were moderately correlated [<i>r</i> = 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.39-0.49). Over a median follow-up of 9.3 years, we recorded 10 423 CVD events. We pooled study-specific hazard ratios for CVD using random-effects meta-analysis. Near and far wall CCA-IMT values were approximately linearly associated with CVD risk. The respective hazard ratios per SD higher value were 1.18 (95% CI: 1.14-1.22; <i>I</i>² = 30.7%) and 1.20 (1.18-1.23; <i>I</i>² = 5.3%) when adjusted for age, sex, and prior CVD and 1.09 (1.07-1.12; <i>I</i>² = 8.4%) and 1.14 (1.12-1.16; <i>I</i>²=1.3%) upon multivariable adjustment (all <i>P</i> < 0.001). Assessing CCA-IMT at both walls provided a greater C-index improvement than assessing CCA-IMT at one wall only [+0.0046 vs. +0.0023 for near (<i>P</i> < 0.001), +0.0037 for far wall (<i>P</i> = 0.006)].</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The associations of near and far wall CCA-IMT with incident CVD were positive, approximately linear, and similarly strong. Improvement in risk discrimination was highest when CCA-IMT was measured at both walls.</p>","PeriodicalId":93995,"journal":{"name":"European heart journal open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/03/c1/oead089.PMC10575622.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European heart journal open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjopen/oead089","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Aims: Current guidelines recommend measuring carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) at the far wall of the common carotid artery (CCA). We aimed to precisely quantify associations of near vs. far wall CCA-IMT with the risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD, defined as coronary heart disease or stroke) and their added predictive values.

Methods and results: We analysed individual records of 41 941 participants from 16 prospective studies in the Proof-ATHERO consortium {mean age 61 years [standard deviation (SD) = 11]; 53% female; 16% prior CVD}. Mean baseline values of near and far wall CCA-IMT were 0.83 (SD = 0.28) and 0.82 (SD = 0.27) mm, differed by a mean of 0.02 mm (95% limits of agreement: -0.40 to 0.43), and were moderately correlated [r = 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.39-0.49). Over a median follow-up of 9.3 years, we recorded 10 423 CVD events. We pooled study-specific hazard ratios for CVD using random-effects meta-analysis. Near and far wall CCA-IMT values were approximately linearly associated with CVD risk. The respective hazard ratios per SD higher value were 1.18 (95% CI: 1.14-1.22; I² = 30.7%) and 1.20 (1.18-1.23; I² = 5.3%) when adjusted for age, sex, and prior CVD and 1.09 (1.07-1.12; I² = 8.4%) and 1.14 (1.12-1.16; I²=1.3%) upon multivariable adjustment (all P < 0.001). Assessing CCA-IMT at both walls provided a greater C-index improvement than assessing CCA-IMT at one wall only [+0.0046 vs. +0.0023 for near (P < 0.001), +0.0037 for far wall (P = 0.006)].

Conclusions: The associations of near and far wall CCA-IMT with incident CVD were positive, approximately linear, and similarly strong. Improvement in risk discrimination was highest when CCA-IMT was measured at both walls.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
心血管风险评估中颈总动脉近壁或远壁内膜-中膜厚度。
目的:目前的指南建议测量颈总动脉(CCA)远壁的颈动脉内膜-中层厚度(IMT)。我们旨在精确量化近壁和远壁CCA-IMT与动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病(CVD,定义为冠心病或中风)风险的相关性及其增加的预测值。方法和结果:我们分析了来自Proof ATHERO联合会16项前瞻性研究的41 941名参与者的个人记录{平均年龄61岁[标准差(SD)=11];53%为女性;16%有心血管疾病病史}。近壁和远壁CCA-IMT的平均基线值分别为0.83(SD=0.28)和0.82(SD=0.27)mm,平均相差0.02 mm(95%的一致性极限:-0.40至0.43),和中度相关[r=0.44;95%置信区间(CI):0.39-0.49)。在9.3年的中位随访中,我们记录了10 423例心血管疾病事件。我们使用随机效应荟萃分析汇总了心血管疾病的研究特异性风险比。近壁和远壁CCA-IMT值与心血管疾病风险近似线性相关。每个SD较高值的相应风险比为1.18(95%可信区间:1.14-1.22;I²=30.7%)和1.20(1.18-1.23;I²=5.3%),和既往CVD和多变量调整后的1.09(1.07-1.12;I²=8.4%)和1.14(1.12-1.16;I²=1.3%)(均P<0.001)。评估两个壁的CCA-IMT比仅评估一个壁的CCA-IMT提供了更大的C指数改善[+0.0046 vs.近壁的+0.0023(P<001),远壁的+0.037(P=0.006)]正的,近似线性的,类似的强。当在两个壁上测量CCA-IMT时,风险辨别的改善最高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The incidence of atrial fibrillation detected by implantable loop recorders: a comparison between patients with and without embolic stroke of undetermined source. Intra-individual variability in lipoprotein(a): the value of a repeat measure for reclassifying individuals at intermediate risk. New data allow to better understand the secrets of lipoprotein(a): is that for sure? Correction to: Correlates and consequences of atrial fibrillation in a prospective study of 25 000 participants in the China Kadoorie Biobank. Colchicine for cardiovascular and limb risk reduction in Medicare beneficiaries with peripheral artery disease: emulation of target trials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1