Khiet Hoang1, Yanglu Zhao1, Julius M Gardin2, Mercedes Carnethon3, Ken Mukamal4, David Yanez5, Nathan D Wong6. 1. Heart Disease Prevention Program, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California. 2. Department of Medicine, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, New Jersey. 3. Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. 4. Department of Medicine, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 6. Heart Disease Prevention Program, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California. Electronic address: ndwong@uci.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the prognostic significance of left ventricular (LV) mass for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in older adults with and without metabolic syndrome (MetS) and diabetes mellitus (DM). BACKGROUND: MetS and DM are associated with increased CVD risk, but it is unclear in these groups whether subclinical CVD as shown by increased LV mass improves risk prediction compared to standard risk factors in older individuals. METHODS: We studied 3,724 adults (mean 72.4 ± 5.4 years of age, 61.0% female, 4.4% African-American) from the Cardiovascular Health Study who had MetS but not DM or had DM alone or had neither condition. Cox regression was used to examine the association of LV mass, (alone and indexed by height and body surface area [BSA]) as determined by echocardiography, with CVD events, including coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, heart failure (HF), and CVD death, as well as total mortality. We also assessed the added prediction, discriminative value, and net reclassification improvement (NRI) for clinical utility of LV mass compared to standard risk factors. RESULTS: Over a mean follow-up of 14.2 ± 6.3 years, 2,180 subjects experienced CVD events, including 986 CVD deaths. After adjustment for age, sex and standard risk factors, LV mass was positively associated with CVD events in those with MetS (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.4, p < 0.001) and without MetS (HR: 1.4, p < 0.001), but not DM (HR: 1.0, p = 0.62), with similar findings for LV mass indexed for height or BSA. Adding LV mass to standard risk factors moderately improved the prediction accuracy in the overall sample and MetS group from changes in C-statistics (p < 0.05). Categorical-free net reclassification improvement increased significantly by 17% to 19% in those with MetS. Findings were comparable for CHD, CVD mortality, and total mortality. CONCLUSIONS: LV mass is associated with increased CVD risk and provides modest added prediction and clinical utility compared to standard risk factors in older persons with and without MetS but not with DM.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the prognostic significance of left ventricular (LV) mass for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in older adults with and without metabolic syndrome (MetS) and diabetes mellitus (DM). BACKGROUND: MetS and DM are associated with increased CVD risk, but it is unclear in these groups whether subclinical CVD as shown by increased LV mass improves risk prediction compared to standard risk factors in older individuals. METHODS: We studied 3,724 adults (mean 72.4 ± 5.4 years of age, 61.0% female, 4.4% African-American) from the Cardiovascular Health Study who had MetS but not DM or had DM alone or had neither condition. Cox regression was used to examine the association of LV mass, (alone and indexed by height and body surface area [BSA]) as determined by echocardiography, with CVD events, including coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, heart failure (HF), and CVD death, as well as total mortality. We also assessed the added prediction, discriminative value, and net reclassification improvement (NRI) for clinical utility of LV mass compared to standard risk factors. RESULTS: Over a mean follow-up of 14.2 ± 6.3 years, 2,180 subjects experienced CVD events, including 986 CVD deaths. After adjustment for age, sex and standard risk factors, LV mass was positively associated with CVD events in those with MetS (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.4, p < 0.001) and without MetS (HR: 1.4, p < 0.001), but not DM (HR: 1.0, p = 0.62), with similar findings for LV mass indexed for height or BSA. Adding LV mass to standard risk factors moderately improved the prediction accuracy in the overall sample and MetS group from changes in C-statistics (p < 0.05). Categorical-free net reclassification improvement increased significantly by 17% to 19% in those with MetS. Findings were comparable for CHD, CVD mortality, and total mortality. CONCLUSIONS: LV mass is associated with increased CVD risk and provides modest added prediction and clinical utility compared to standard risk factors in older persons with and without MetS but not with DM.
Authors: Brian R Lindman; Suzanne V Arnold; José A Madrazo; Alan Zajarias; Stephanie N Johnson; Julio E Pérez; Douglas L Mann Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2011-02-25 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: L H Kuller; P Velentgas; J Barzilay; N J Beauchamp; D H O'Leary; P J Savage Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 8.311
Authors: Cecil M Burchfiel; Thomas N Skelton; Michael E Andrew; Robert J Garrison; Donna K Arnett; Daniel W Jones; Herman A Taylor Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-08-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: J M Gardin; N D Wong; W Bommer; H S Klopfenstein; V E Smith; B Tabatznik; D Siscovick; S Lobodzinski; H Anton-Culver; T A Manolio Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 1992 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Jithendra B Somaratne; Gillian A Whalley; Katrina K Poppe; Mariska M ter Bals; Gina Wadams; Ann Pearl; Warwick Bagg; Rob N Doughty Journal: Cardiovasc Diabetol Date: 2011-04-14 Impact factor: 9.951
Authors: Shaista Malik; Matthew J Budoff; Ronit Katz; Roger S Blumenthal; Alain G Bertoni; Khurram Nasir; Moyses Szklo; R Graham Barr; Nathan D Wong Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2011-08-15 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Hwa Mu Lee; Yanglu Zhao; Michael A Liu; David Yanez; Mercedes Carnethon; R Graham Barr; Nathan D Wong Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2018-07-17 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Haider Aldiwani; Michael D Nelson; Behzad Sharif; Janet Wei; T Jake Samuel; Nissi Suppogu; Odayme Quesada; Galen Cook-Wiens; Edward Gill; Lidia S Szczepaniak; Louise E J Thomson; Balaji Tamarappoo; Anum Asif; Chrisandra Shufelt; Daniel Berman; C Noel Bairey Merz Journal: Vessel Plus Date: 2022-03-05
Authors: Andrea Sonaglioni; Federica Cerini; Antonio Cerrone; Lorenzo Argiento; Gian Luigi Nicolosi; Elisabetta Rigamonti; Michele Lombardo; Maria Grazia Rumi; Mauro Viganò Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2022-03-17 Impact factor: 5.472
Authors: Muhammet Dural; Göknur Yorulmaz; Elif Sevil Alagüney; Kadir Uğur Mert; Ezgi Çamli; Ahmet Toygar Kalkan; Aysen Akalin; Nur Kebapçi; Ahmet Serdar Yilmaz; Selda Murat; Belgin Efe Journal: Turk J Med Sci Date: 2021-10-21 Impact factor: 0.973
Authors: Brittany S Hollerbach; Kevin C Mathias; Donald Stewart; Kepra Jack; Denise L Smith Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 2.306