OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare internal carotid artery (ICA) intima-media thickness (IMT) with common carotid artery (CCA) IMT as global markers of cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: Cross-sectional measurements of the mean CCA IMT and maximum ICA IMT were made on ultrasound images acquired from the Framingham Offspring cohort (n = 3316; mean age, 58 years; 52.7% women). Linear regression models were used to study the associations of the Framingham risk factors with CCA and ICA IMT. Multivariate logistic regression models and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were used to compare the associations of prevalent CVD with CCA and ICA IMT and determine sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: The association between age and the mean CCA IMT corresponded to an increase of 0.007 mm/y; the increase was 0.037 mm/y for the ICA IMT. Framingham risk factors accounted for 28.6% and 27.5% of the variability in the CCA and ICA IMT, respectively. Age and gender contributed 23.5% to the variability of the CCA IMT and 22.5% to that of the ICA IMT, with the next most important factor being systolic blood pressure (1.9%) for the CCA IMT and smoking (1.6%) for the ICA IMT. The CCA IMT and ICA IMT were statistically significant predictors of prevalent CVD, with the ICA IMT having a larger area under the ROC curve (0.756 versus 0.695). CONCLUSIONS: Associations of risk factors with CCA and ICA IMT are slightly different, and both are independently associated with prevalent CVD. Their value for predicting incident cardiovascular events needs to be compared in outcome studies.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare internal carotid artery (ICA) intima-media thickness (IMT) with common carotid artery (CCA) IMT as global markers of cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: Cross-sectional measurements of the mean CCA IMT and maximum ICA IMT were made on ultrasound images acquired from the Framingham Offspring cohort (n = 3316; mean age, 58 years; 52.7% women). Linear regression models were used to study the associations of the Framingham risk factors with CCA and ICA IMT. Multivariate logistic regression models and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were used to compare the associations of prevalent CVD with CCA and ICA IMT and determine sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: The association between age and the mean CCA IMT corresponded to an increase of 0.007 mm/y; the increase was 0.037 mm/y for the ICA IMT. Framingham risk factors accounted for 28.6% and 27.5% of the variability in the CCA and ICA IMT, respectively. Age and gender contributed 23.5% to the variability of the CCA IMT and 22.5% to that of the ICA IMT, with the next most important factor being systolic blood pressure (1.9%) for the CCA IMT and smoking (1.6%) for the ICA IMT. The CCA IMT and ICA IMT were statistically significant predictors of prevalent CVD, with the ICA IMT having a larger area under the ROC curve (0.756 versus 0.695). CONCLUSIONS: Associations of risk factors with CCA and ICA IMT are slightly different, and both are independently associated with prevalent CVD. Their value for predicting incident cardiovascular events needs to be compared in outcome studies.
Authors: L E Chambless; G Heiss; A R Folsom; W Rosamond; M Szklo; A R Sharrett; L X Clegg Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1997-09-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: C Bonithon-Kopp; P J Touboul; C Berr; C Leroux; F Mainard; D Courbon; P Ducimetière Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 1996-02 Impact factor: 8.311
Authors: H C Stary; A B Chandler; R E Dinsmore; V Fuster; S Glagov; W Insull; M E Rosenfeld; C J Schwartz; W D Wagner; R W Wissler Journal: Circulation Date: 1995-09-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: D H O'Leary; J F Polak; R A Kronmal; P J Savage; N O Borhani; S J Kittner; R Tracy; J M Gardin; T R Price; C D Furberg Journal: Stroke Date: 1996-02 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: C D Furberg; H P Adams; W B Applegate; R P Byington; M A Espeland; T Hartwell; D B Hunninghake; D S Lefkowitz; J Probstfield; W A Riley Journal: Circulation Date: 1994-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Joseph F Polak; Allison Meisner; Michael J Pencina; Philip A Wolf; Ralph B D'Agostino Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2012-06-20 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Kazuhiro Osawa; Rine Nakanishi; Robyn L McClelland; Joseph F Polak; Warrick Bishop; Ralph L Sacco; Indre Ceponiene; Negin Nezarat; Sina Rahmani; Hong Qi; Mitsuru Kanisawa; Matthew J Budoff Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2018-05-17 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Deepa M Gopal; Martin G Larson; James L Januzzi; Susan Cheng; Anahita Ghorbani; Kai C Wollert; Tibor Kempf; Ralph B D'Agostino; Joseph F Polak; Vasan S Ramachandran; Thomas J Wang; Jennifer E Ho Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2014-09-18 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Joseph F Polak; Russell Tracy; Anita Harrington; Anna E H Zavodni; Daniel H O'Leary Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2013-03-21 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Tatjana Rundek; Susan H Blanton; Susanne Bartels; Chuanhui Dong; Ami Raval; Ryan T Demmer; Digna Cabral; Mitchell S V Elkind; Ralph L Sacco; Moise Desvarieux Journal: Stroke Date: 2013-05-23 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Matthew C Tattersall; Amanda Gassett; Claudia E Korcarz; Adam D Gepner; Joel D Kaufman; Kiang J Liu; Brad C Astor; Lianne Sheppard; Richard A Kronmal; James H Stein Journal: Stroke Date: 2014-09-11 Impact factor: 7.914