BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) progression rates are increasingly used as an intermediate outcome for vascular risk. The carotid bifurcation (BIF) and internal carotid artery (ICA) are predilection sites for atherosclerosis. IMT measures from these sites may be a better estimate of atherosclerosis than common carotid artery (CCA) IMT. The study aim was to evaluate site-specific IMT progression rates and their relationships to vascular risk factors compared with baseline IMT measurements. METHODS: In a community population (n=3383), ICA-IMT, BIF-IMT, CCA-IMT, and vascular risk factors were evaluated at baseline and at 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: Mean (SD) IMT progression was significantly greater at the ICA (0.032 [0.109] mm/year) compared with the BIF (0.023 [0.108] mm/year) and the CCA (0.001 [0.040] mm/year) (P<0.001). Only ICA-IMT progression significantly correlated with baseline vascular risk factors (age, male gender, hypertension, diabetes, and smoking). Change in risk factor profile over follow-up, estimated using the Framingham risk score, was a predictor of IMT progression only. For all arterial sites, correlations were stronger, by a factor of 2 to 3, for associations with baseline IMT compared with IMT progression. CONCLUSIONS: Progression rates at the ICA rather than the CCA yield greater absolute changes in IMT and better correlations with vascular risk factors. Vascular risk factors correlate more strongly with baseline IMT than with IMT progression. Prospective data on IMT progression and incident vascular events are required to establish the true value of progression data as a surrogate measure of vascular risk.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) progression rates are increasingly used as an intermediate outcome for vascular risk. The carotid bifurcation (BIF) and internal carotid artery (ICA) are predilection sites for atherosclerosis. IMT measures from these sites may be a better estimate of atherosclerosis than common carotid artery (CCA) IMT. The study aim was to evaluate site-specific IMT progression rates and their relationships to vascular risk factors compared with baseline IMT measurements. METHODS: In a community population (n=3383), ICA-IMT, BIF-IMT, CCA-IMT, and vascular risk factors were evaluated at baseline and at 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: Mean (SD) IMT progression was significantly greater at the ICA (0.032 [0.109] mm/year) compared with the BIF (0.023 [0.108] mm/year) and the CCA (0.001 [0.040] mm/year) (P<0.001). Only ICA-IMT progression significantly correlated with baseline vascular risk factors (age, male gender, hypertension, diabetes, and smoking). Change in risk factor profile over follow-up, estimated using the Framingham risk score, was a predictor of IMT progression only. For all arterial sites, correlations were stronger, by a factor of 2 to 3, for associations with baseline IMT compared with IMT progression. CONCLUSIONS: Progression rates at the ICA rather than the CCA yield greater absolute changes in IMT and better correlations with vascular risk factors. Vascular risk factors correlate more strongly with baseline IMT than with IMT progression. Prospective data on IMT progression and incident vascular events are required to establish the true value of progression data as a surrogate measure of vascular risk.
Authors: R Lupoli; M N D Di Minno; C Guidone; C Cefalo; B Capaldo; G Riccardi; G Mingrone Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2015-09-21 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: José R Romero; Alexa Beiser; Sudha Seshadri; Emelia J Benjamin; Joseph F Polak; Ramachandran S Vasan; Rhoda Au; Charles DeCarli; Philip A Wolf Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-03-05 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Amy S Shah; Lawrence M Dolan; Philip R Khoury; Zhiqan Gao; Thomas R Kimball; Elaine M Urbina Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2015-05-14 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Amy S Shah; Zhiqian Gao; Elaine M Urbina; Thomas R Kimball; Lawrence M Dolan Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2014-01-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Jose R Romero; Ramachandran S Vasan; Alexa S Beiser; Joseph F Polak; Emelia J Benjamin; Philip A Wolf; Sudha Seshadri Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2008 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: Renke Maas; Vanessa Xanthakis; Joseph F Polak; Edzard Schwedhelm; Lisa M Sullivan; Ralf Benndorf; Friedrich Schulze; Ramachandran S Vasan; Philip A Wolf; Rainer H Böger; Sudha Seshadri Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-06-04 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Thomas Bobbert; Knut Mai; Antje Fischer-Rosinsky; Andreas F H Pfeiffer; Joachim Spranger Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2009-10-06 Impact factor: 19.112