Tatjana Rundek1, Hannah Gardener2, David Della-Morte3, Chuanhui Dong4, Digna Cabral4, Eduardo Tiozzo5, Eugene Roberts4, Milita Crisby6, Kuen Cheung7, Ryan Demmer8, Mitchell S V Elkind9, Ralph L Sacco10, Moise Desvarieux11. 1. Department of Neurology, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: trundek@med.miami.edu. 2. Department of Neurology, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: hgardener@med.miami.edu. 3. Department of Neurology, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Systems Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Rome 'Tor Vergata', Via Montpellier 1, 00133 Rome, Italy; IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana, Rome, Italy. 4. Department of Neurology, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Psychiatry, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA. 6. Department of Neurology, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, 14186 Stockholm, Sweden. 7. Department of Biostatistics, Mailman Public School of Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 8. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 9. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA; Department of Neurology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 10. Department of Neurology, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA. 11. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA; Centre de Recherches Epidemiologies et Biostatistique, INSERM U1153, Paris, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) and carotid plaque (CP) are proposed biomarkers of subclinical atherosclerosis associated with stroke risk. Whether cIMT and CP are distinct phenotypes or single traits at different stages of atherosclerotic development is unclear. We explored the relationship between these markers in the population-based Northern Manhattan Study. METHODS: We used high-resolution ultrasound and validated imaging protocols to study the cross-sectional (N = 1788 stroke-free participants) and prospective relationship (N = 768 with follow-up scan; mean years between examinations = 3.5) between CP and cIMT measured in plaque-free areas. RESULTS: The mean age was 66 ± 9 (40% male, 19% black, 17% white, 61% Hispanic). The mean baseline cIMT was 0.92 ± 0.09 mm, 0.94 ± 0.09 mm among the 58% with prevalent plaque, 0.90 ± 0.08 mm among the 42% without prevalent plaque (p < 0.0001). Each 0.1 mm increase in baseline cIMT was associated with a 1.72-fold increased odds of plaque presence (95%CI = 1.50-1.97), increased plaque thickness (effect on the median = 0.46 mm, p < 0.0001), and increased plaque area (effect on the median = 3.45 mm(2), p < 0.0001), adjusting for demographics and vascular risk factors. Elevated baseline cIMT was associated with an increased risk of new plaque in any location at follow-up, but after adjusting for demographics and vascular risk factors this association was no longer present. No association was observed in carotid segment-specific analyses. CONCLUSION: Increased cIMT was associated with baseline prevalent plaque but did not predict incident plaque independent of other vascular risk factors. This finding suggests that increased cIMT is not an independent predictor of plaque development although these atherosclerotic phenotypes often coexist and share some common vascular determinants.
OBJECTIVE:Carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) and carotid plaque (CP) are proposed biomarkers of subclinical atherosclerosis associated with stroke risk. Whether cIMT and CP are distinct phenotypes or single traits at different stages of atherosclerotic development is unclear. We explored the relationship between these markers in the population-based Northern Manhattan Study. METHODS: We used high-resolution ultrasound and validated imaging protocols to study the cross-sectional (N = 1788 stroke-free participants) and prospective relationship (N = 768 with follow-up scan; mean years between examinations = 3.5) between CP and cIMT measured in plaque-free areas. RESULTS: The mean age was 66 ± 9 (40% male, 19% black, 17% white, 61% Hispanic). The mean baseline cIMT was 0.92 ± 0.09 mm, 0.94 ± 0.09 mm among the 58% with prevalent plaque, 0.90 ± 0.08 mm among the 42% without prevalent plaque (p < 0.0001). Each 0.1 mm increase in baseline cIMT was associated with a 1.72-fold increased odds of plaque presence (95%CI = 1.50-1.97), increased plaque thickness (effect on the median = 0.46 mm, p < 0.0001), and increased plaque area (effect on the median = 3.45 mm(2), p < 0.0001), adjusting for demographics and vascular risk factors. Elevated baseline cIMT was associated with an increased risk of new plaque in any location at follow-up, but after adjusting for demographics and vascular risk factors this association was no longer present. No association was observed in carotid segment-specific analyses. CONCLUSION: Increased cIMT was associated with baseline prevalent plaque but did not predict incident plaque independent of other vascular risk factors. This finding suggests that increased cIMT is not an independent predictor of plaque development although these atherosclerotic phenotypes often coexist and share some common vascular determinants.
Authors: Tanja Rundek; Mitchell S Elkind; John Pittman; Bernadette Boden-Albala; Steve Martin; Steve E Humphries; Suh-Hang Hank Juo; Ralph L Sacco Journal: Stroke Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Valentin Fuster; Pedro R Moreno; Zahi A Fayad; Roberto Corti; Juan J Badimon Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-09-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Moïse Desvarieux; Ryan T Demmer; Tatjana Rundek; Bernadette Boden-Albala; David R Jacobs; Ralph L Sacco; Panos N Papapanou Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-02-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Tatjana Rundek; Rameet Hundle; Elizabeth Ratchford; Romel Ramas; Robert Sciacca; Marco R Di Tullio; Bernadette Boden-Albala; Yumiko Miyake; Mitchell S V Elkind; Ralph L Sacco; Shunichi Homma Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord Date: 2006-08-17 Impact factor: 2.298
Authors: Eduard Tiozzo; Hannah Gardener; Barry I Hudson; Chuanhui Dong; David Della-Morte; Milita Crisby; Ronald B Goldberg; Mitchell S V Elkind; Ying Kuen Cheung; Clinton B Wright; Ralph L Sacco; Moise Desvarieux; Tatjana Rundek Journal: Stroke Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Ankush Jamthikar; Deep Gupta; Luca Saba; Narendra N Khanna; Tadashi Araki; Klaudija Viskovic; Sophie Mavrogeni; John R Laird; Gyan Pareek; Martin Miner; Petros P Sfikakis; Athanasios Protogerou; Vijay Viswanathan; Aditya Sharma; Andrew Nicolaides; George D Kitas; Jasjit S Suri Journal: Cardiovasc Diagn Ther Date: 2020-08
Authors: Brett Doliner; Chuanhui Dong; Susan H Blanton; Hannah Gardener; Mitchell S V Elkind; Ralph L Sacco; Ryan T Demmer; Moise Desvarieux; Tatjana Rundek Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2017-11-02 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: Tatjana Rundek; David Della-Morte; Hannah Gardener; Chuanhui Dong; Matthew S Markert; Jose Gutierrez; Eugene Roberts; Mitchell S V Elkind; Charles DeCarli; Ralph L Sacco; Clinton B Wright Journal: Neurology Date: 2017-04-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Farid Khasiyev; Tatjana Rundek; Marco R Di Tullio; Clinton B Wright; Ralph L Sacco; Mitchell S V Elkind; Jose Gutierrez Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2021-06-16 Impact factor: 3.156
Authors: Deborah L Jones; Violeta J Rodriguez; Maria L Alcaide; Nicole Barylski; Digna Cabral; Tatjana Rundek; Stephen M Weiss; Mahendra Kumar Journal: South Med J Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 0.954