BACKGROUND: In the Gutenberg Health Study, a random sample of the population was scanned with vascular ultrasound for early atherosclerosis. A continuous classical risk marker model (waist circumference, HbA1c, LDL/HDL ratio, pack years and pulse pressure) was compared to a model of modern biomarkers (C-reactive protein, troponin I, N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide, copeptin, mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin, and asymmetric dimethylarginine) with regard to the ability of ruling out abnormal intima-media thickness (IMT), respectively, carotid plaques. METHODS: Data of the first consecutive 5,000 participants (aged 35-74 years; 2,540 men, 2,460 women) were analyzed. IMT was measured at both common carotid arteries using an edge detection system. Plaques were defined as protrusion of ≥1.5 mm in common, internal and external carotid artery. RESULTS: For classical risk factors, in comparison to a model of six modern biomarkers, regarding the variable (a) IMT>0.85 mm negative and positive predictive value (NPV and PPV) were 0.98 and 0.16 for both the classical risk factor model and the biomarker model. The second variable (b) presence of plaque could be ruled out with an NPV of 0.84 and identified with a PPV of 0.61 for classical risk factors, and 0.84 and 0.58 for biomarkers, respectively. Values were calculated using logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Classical risk factors allow ruling out pathologic IMT and presence of carotid plaques in a population of primary prevention in a reliable way. Modern biomarkers performed almost equally well but did not provide further information.
BACKGROUND: In the Gutenberg Health Study, a random sample of the population was scanned with vascular ultrasound for early atherosclerosis. A continuous classical risk marker model (waist circumference, HbA1c, LDL/HDL ratio, pack years and pulse pressure) was compared to a model of modern biomarkers (C-reactive protein, troponin I, N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide, copeptin, mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin, and asymmetric dimethylarginine) with regard to the ability of ruling out abnormal intima-media thickness (IMT), respectively, carotid plaques. METHODS: Data of the first consecutive 5,000 participants (aged 35-74 years; 2,540 men, 2,460 women) were analyzed. IMT was measured at both common carotid arteries using an edge detection system. Plaques were defined as protrusion of ≥1.5 mm in common, internal and external carotid artery. RESULTS: For classical risk factors, in comparison to a model of six modern biomarkers, regarding the variable (a) IMT>0.85 mm negative and positive predictive value (NPV and PPV) were 0.98 and 0.16 for both the classical risk factor model and the biomarker model. The second variable (b) presence of plaque could be ruled out with an NPV of 0.84 and identified with a PPV of 0.61 for classical risk factors, and 0.84 and 0.58 for biomarkers, respectively. Values were calculated using logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Classical risk factors allow ruling out pathologic IMT and presence of carotid plaques in a population of primary prevention in a reliable way. Modern biomarkers performed almost equally well but did not provide further information.
Authors: Matthias W Lorenz; Joseph F Polak; Maryam Kavousi; Ellisiv B Mathiesen; Henry Völzke; Tomi-Pekka Tuomainen; Dirk Sander; Matthieu Plichart; Alberico L Catapano; Christine M Robertson; Stefan Kiechl; Tatjana Rundek; Moïse Desvarieux; Lars Lind; Caroline Schmid; Pronabesh DasMahapatra; Lu Gao; Kathrin Ziegelbauer; Michiel L Bots; Simon G Thompson Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-04-27 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Bob Siegerink; Renke Maas; Carla Y Vossen; Edzard Schwedhelm; Wolfgang Koenig; Rainer Böger; Dietrich Rothenbacher; Hermann Brenner; Lutz P Breitling Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2012-10-17 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Oludamilola W Oluleye; Aaron R Folsom; Vijay Nambi; Pamela L Lutsey; Christie M Ballantyne Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2012-12-08 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Till Keller; Francisco Ojeda; Tanja Zeller; Philipp S Wild; Stergios Tzikas; Christoph R Sinning; Dirk Peetz; Thomas Münzel; Stefan Blankenberg; Karl J Lackner Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2012-05-04 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Jasper Boeddinghaus; Tobias Reichlin; Thomas Nestelberger; Raphael Twerenbold; Yvette Meili; Karin Wildi; Petra Hillinger; Maria Rubini Giménez; Janosch Cupa; Lukas Schumacher; Marie Schubera; Patrick Badertscher; Sydney Corbière; Karin Grimm; Christian Puelacher; Zaid Sabti; Dayana Flores Widmer; Nicolas Schaerli; Nikola Kozhuharov; Samyut Shrestha; Tobias Bürge; Patrick Mächler; Michael Büchi; Katharina Rentsch; Òscar Miró; Beatriz López; F Javier Martin-Sanchez; Esther Rodriguez-Adrada; Beata Morawiec; Damian Kawecki; Eva Ganovská; Jiri Parenica; Jens Lohrmann; Andreas Buser; Dagmar I Keller; Stefan Osswald; Christian Mueller Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Christian A Gleissner; Christian Erbel; Julia Haeussler; Mohammadreza Akhavanpoor; Gabriele Domschke; Fabian Linden; Andreas O Doesch; Göran Conradson; Sebastian J Buss; Nina P Hofmann; Gitsios Gitsioudis; Hugo A Katus; Grigorios Korosoglou Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2014-08-08 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: J Kammler; H Blessberger; T Lambert; J Kellermair; M Grund; A Nahler; M Lichtenauer; S Schwarz; C Reiter; C Steinwender; A Kypta Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-02-08 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Iwona Kurkowska-Jastrzebska; Michał A Karlinski; Beata Błazejewska-Hyzorek; Iwona Sarzynska-Dlugosz; Krzysztof J Filipiak; Anna Czlonkowska Journal: Croat Med J Date: 2016-12-31 Impact factor: 1.351
Authors: Alexander Weissgerber; Markus Scholz; Andrej Teren; Marcus Sandri; Daniel Teupser; Stephan Gielen; Joachim Thiery; Gerhard Schuler; Frank Beutner Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2015-09-11 Impact factor: 5.460