Anderson C Armstrong1, Kiang Liu2, Cora E Lewis3, Stephen Sidney4, Laura A Colangelo2, Satoru Kishi5, Bharath Ambale-Venkatesh5, Alex Arynchyn3, David R Jacobs6, Luís C L Correia7, Samuel S Gidding8, João A C Lima9. 1. Department of Cardiology/Cardiovascular Imaging, Johns Hopkins University, 600 N. Wolfe Street/Blalock 524, Baltimore, MD 21287-0409, USA Universidade Federal do Vale do São Francisco, Petrolina, PE, Brazil. 2. Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA. 3. University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 4. Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA, USA. 5. Department of Cardiology/Cardiovascular Imaging, Johns Hopkins University, 600 N. Wolfe Street/Blalock 524, Baltimore, MD 21287-0409, USA. 6. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 7. Escola Bahiana de Medicina, Salvador, BA, Brazil. 8. Nemours Cardiac Center, Wilmington, DE, USA. 9. Department of Cardiology/Cardiovascular Imaging, Johns Hopkins University, 600 N. Wolfe Street/Blalock 524, Baltimore, MD 21287-0409, USA jlima@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
AIMS: We investigated whether the addition of left atrial (LA) size determined by echocardiography improves cardiovascular risk prediction in young adults over and above the clinically established Framingham 10-year global CV risk score (FRS). METHODS AND RESULTS: We included white and black CARDIA participants who had echocardiograms in Year-5 examination (1990-91). The combined endpoint after 20 years was incident fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular disease: myocardial infarction, heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral artery disease, and atrial fibrillation/flutter. Echocardiography-derived M-mode LA diameter (LAD; n = 4082; 149 events) and 2D four-chamber LA area (LAA; n = 2412; 77 events) were then indexed by height or body surface area (BSA). We used Cox regression, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC), and net reclassification improvement (NRI) to assess the prediction power of LA size when added to calculated FRS or FRS covariates. The LAD and LAA cohorts had similar characteristics; mean LAD/height was 2.1 ± 0.3 mm/m and LAA/height 9.3 ± 2.0 mm(2)/m. After indexing by height and adjusting for FRS covariates, hazard ratios were 1.31 (95% CI 1.12, 1.60) and 1.43 (95% CI 1.13, 1.80) for LAD and LAA, respectively; AUC was 0.77 for LAD and 0.78 for LAA. When LAD and LAA were indexed to BSA, the results were similar but slightly inferior. Both LAD and LAA showed modest reclassification ability, with non-significant NRIs. CONCLUSION: LA size measurements independently predict clinical outcomes. However, it only improves discrimination over clinical parameters modestly without altering risk classification. Indexing LA size by height is at least as robust as by BSA. Further research is needed to assess subgroups of young adults who may benefit from LA size information in risk stratification. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: We investigated whether the addition of left atrial (LA) size determined by echocardiography improves cardiovascular risk prediction in young adults over and above the clinically established Framingham 10-year global CV risk score (FRS). METHODS AND RESULTS: We included white and black CARDIA participants who had echocardiograms in Year-5 examination (1990-91). The combined endpoint after 20 years was incident fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular disease: myocardial infarction, heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral artery disease, and atrial fibrillation/flutter. Echocardiography-derived M-mode LA diameter (LAD; n = 4082; 149 events) and 2D four-chamber LA area (LAA; n = 2412; 77 events) were then indexed by height or body surface area (BSA). We used Cox regression, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC), and net reclassification improvement (NRI) to assess the prediction power of LA size when added to calculated FRS or FRS covariates. The LAD and LAA cohorts had similar characteristics; mean LAD/height was 2.1 ± 0.3 mm/m and LAA/height 9.3 ± 2.0 mm(2)/m. After indexing by height and adjusting for FRS covariates, hazard ratios were 1.31 (95% CI 1.12, 1.60) and 1.43 (95% CI 1.13, 1.80) for LAD and LAA, respectively; AUC was 0.77 for LAD and 0.78 for LAA. When LAD and LAA were indexed to BSA, the results were similar but slightly inferior. Both LAD and LAA showed modest reclassification ability, with non-significant NRIs. CONCLUSION: LA size measurements independently predict clinical outcomes. However, it only improves discrimination over clinical parameters modestly without altering risk classification. Indexing LA size by height is at least as robust as by BSA. Further research is needed to assess subgroups of young adults who may benefit from LA size information in risk stratification. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Julius M Gardin; Carlos Iribarren; Robert C Detrano; Kiang Liu; Pamela J Schreiner; Catherine M Loria; Nathan D Wong Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2005-03-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Roberto M Lang; Michelle Bierig; Richard B Devereux; Frank A Flachskampf; Elyse Foster; Patricia A Pellikka; Michael H Picard; Mary J Roman; James Seward; Jack S Shanewise; Scott D Solomon; Kirk T Spencer; Martin St John Sutton; William J Stewart Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Martin Osranek; Francesca Bursi; Kent R Bailey; Brandon R Grossardt; Robert D Brown; Stephen L Kopecky; Teresa S Tsang; James B Seward Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2005-09-01 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Teresa S M Tsang; Walter P Abhayaratna; Marion E Barnes; Yoko Miyasaka; Bernard J Gersh; Kent R Bailey; Stephen S Cha; James B Seward Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-02-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Catherine M Loria; Kiang Liu; Cora E Lewis; Stephen B Hulley; Stephen Sidney; Pamela J Schreiner; O Dale Williams; Diane E Bild; Robert Detrano Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-05-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Anderson C Armstrong; Ola Gjesdal; André Almeida; Marcelo Nacif; Colin Wu; David A Bluemke; Lyndia Brumback; João A C Lima Journal: Echocardiography Date: 2013-08-10 Impact factor: 1.724
Authors: G D Friedman; G R Cutter; R P Donahue; G H Hughes; S B Hulley; D R Jacobs; K Liu; P J Savage Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 1988 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: J M Gardin; L E Wagenknecht; H Anton-Culver; J Flack; S Gidding; T Kurosaki; N D Wong; T A Manolio Journal: Circulation Date: 1995-08-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Alessandra Meris; Maria Amigoni; Hajime Uno; Jens Jakob Thune; Anil Verma; Lars Køber; Mikhail Bourgoun; John J McMurray; Eric J Velazquez; Aldo P Maggioni; Jalal Ghali; J Malcolm O Arnold; Steven Zelenkofske; Marc A Pfeffer; Scott D Solomon Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2008-11-11 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Walter Oliver; Gwendolyn Matthews; Colby R Ayers; Sonia Garg; Sachin Gupta; Ian J Neeland; Mark H Drazner; Jarett D Berry; Susan Matulevicius; James A de Lemos Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Brendan N Putko; Haran Yogasundaram; Kelvin Chow; Joseph Pagano; Aneal Khan; D Ian Paterson; Richard B Thompson; Gavin Y Oudit Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-03-06 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Anderson C Armstrong; Bharath Ambale-Venkatesh; Evrim Turkbey; Sirisha Donekal; Elzbieta Chamera; Jye-Yu Backlund; Patricia Cleary; John Lachin; David A Bluemke; João A C Lima Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Chike C Nwabuo; Yuichiro Yano; Henrique T Moreira; Duke Appiah; Henrique D Vasconcellos; Queen N Aghaji; Anthony Viera; Jamal S Rana; Ravi V Shah; Venkatesh L Murthy; Norrina B Allen; Pamela J Schreiner; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; João A C Lima Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Vinithra Varadarajan; Bharath Ambale-Venkatesh; Seo Young Hong; Mohammadali Habibi; Hiroshi Ashikaga; Colin O Wu; Lin Y Chen; Susan R Heckbert; David A Bluemke; Joao A C Lima Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2021-06-22 Impact factor: 3.080
Authors: Lucy J Goudswaard; Sean Harrison; Daniel Van De Klee; Nishi Chaturvedi; Debbie A Lawlor; George Davey Smith; Alun D Hughes; Laura D Howe Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-06-16 Impact factor: 3.240