| Literature DB >> 25628215 |
Mario Gaarder1, Therese Seierstad.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Carotid intima media thickness (CIMT) measured with ultrasound (US) is widely used as biomarker for arteriosclerosis and as surrogate endpoint in interventional studies to assess efficacy of drug therapies. Strict US protocols are necessary to ensure reproducibility. The range of US signal intensities used for image formation, the dynamic range (DR), is rarely reported in studies and little is known about its effect on CIMT measurements in humans. The purpose of this study was to quantify the impact of DR on measurements of CIMT.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25628215 PMCID: PMC4328984 DOI: 10.1186/1476-7120-13-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound ISSN: 1476-7120 Impact factor: 2.062
Figure 1Intima-media complex in the CCA. The figure shows the distal two centimetres of the CCA. Intima, media and adventitia are indicated as well as the one centimetre area in which CIMT is measured.
Demographic data
| Total | The ABD-study | The INFO-study | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arteries [n] | 313 | 181* | 132** |
| Participants [n] | 165 | 96 | 69 |
| Males [%] | 31 | 47 | 100 |
| Age [yrs.] | 27.7 (10.9) | 19.0 (3.1) | 39.9 (3.5) |
| Diabetics [%] | 31 | 60 | 1 |
| Systolic BP [mmHg] | 123.6 (11.1) | 119.6 (9.5) | 129.2 (10.7) |
| Diastolic BP [mmHg] | 74.5 (9.5) | 69.9 (7.6) | 81.0 (8.1) |
*missing DR 40 dB data in one participant, **missing DR 40 dB data in two participants, and 55, 70 and 85 dB data in one participant. Only one artery was examined in nine participants in the ABD-study and in five participants in the INFO-study.
Figure 2CIMT measurements of the same CCA for different DRs. The figure show from top left (clockwise) identical US images of the CCA, where the DR is changed, and the CIMTmean and CIMTmax measurements differ. A) This image is captured using DR 40 dB, yielding CIMTmean and CIMTmax measurements of 0.603 and 0.687 millimetres, respectively B) US image captured using 55 dB, CIMTmean and CIMTmax were 0.648 and 0.713 millimetres. C) US image captured using 70 dB, CIMTmean and CIMTmax were 0.679 and 0.743. D) US image captured using 85 dB, CIMTmean and CIMTmax were 0.691 and 0.750 millimetre.
Measurements of CIMT with different DR settings
| Population | CIMT measure | n | DR setting | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40 dB | 55 dB | 70 dB | 85 dB | |||
|
| CIMTmean [mm] | 181 | 0.488 ± 0.066 | 0.521 ± 0.066 | 0.547 ± 0.066 | 0.563 ± 0.066 |
| CIMTmax [mm] | 181 | 0.578 ± 0.074 | 0.619 ± 0.072 | 0.648 ± 0.071 | 0.669 ± 0.070 | |
|
| CIMTmean [mm] | 130 | 0.586 ± 0.091 | 0.621 ± 0.093 | 0.648 ± 0.095 | 0.662 ± 0.095 |
| CIMTmax [mm] | 130 | 0.691 ± 0.107 | 0.732 ± 0.107 | 0.765 ± 0.109 | 0.780 ± 0.108 | |
|
| CIMTmean [mm] | 311 | 0.529 ± 0.091 | 0.564 ± 0.093 | 0.590 ± 0.094 | 0.605 ± 0.093 |
| CIMTmax [mm] | 311 | 0.626 ± 0.105 | 0.667 ± 0.105 | 0.698 ± 0.106 | 0.716 ± 0.104 | |
Data on DR 40 dB was missing in one participant in the ABD group and two in the INFO group.
All measurement values are given as mean and standard deviation.
Absolute differences in CIMT between the different DR steps
| DR step | ABD | INFO | TOTAL | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Difference | 95% CI | Difference | 95% CI | Difference | 95% CI | ||
| [dB] | [mm] | [mm] | [mm] | [mm] | [mm] | [mm] | |
|
| 40-55 | 0.032 | (0.030, 0.035) | 0.037 | (0.034, 0.041) | 0.034 | (0.032, 0.036) |
| 55-70 | 0.026 | (0.025, 0.028) | 0.027 | (0.025, 0.030) | 0.027 | (0.025, 0.028) | |
| 70-85 | 0.016 | (0.014, 0.017) | 0.014 | (0.012, 0,016) | 0.015 | (0.014,0.016) | |
|
| 40-55 | 0.041 | (0.037,0.044) | 0.043 | (0.039, 0.048) | 0.042 | (0.039, 0.045) |
| 55-70 | 0.029 | (0.026,0.032) | 0.033 | (0.029, 0.038) | 0.031 | (0.029, 0.033) | |
| 70-85 | 0.020 | (0.018,0.023) | 0.015 | (0.012, 0.019) | 0.018 | (0.016, 0.020) | |
For all comparisons p < 0.001. All differences are given as mean values, and in millimetres.