Abdullahi O Oseni1, Waqas T Qureshi1, Mohamed F Almahmoud1, Alain G Bertoni2, David A Bluemke3, William G Hundley1, Joao A C Lima4, David M Herrington1, Elsayed Z Soliman1,2. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Section on Cardiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Prevention, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA. 3. Radiology and Imaging Sciences, NIH Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine if there is a significant difference in the predictive abilities of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) detected by ECG-LVH versus LVH ascertained by cardiac MRI-LVH in a model similar to the Framingham Heart Failure Risk Score (FHFRS). METHODS: This study included 4745 (mean age 61±10 years, 53.5% women, 61.7% non-whites) participants in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. ECG-LVH was defined using Cornell voltage product while MRI-LVH was derived from left ventricular mass. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to examine the association between ECG-LVH and MRI-LVH with incident heart failure (HF). Harrell's concordance C-index was used to estimate the predictive ability of the model when either ECG-LVH or MRI-LVH was included as one of its components. RESULTS: ECG-LVH was present in 291 (6.1%), while MRI-LVH was present in 499 (10.5%) of the participants. Both ECG-LVH (HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.69) and MRI-LVH (HR 3.80, 95% CI 1.56 to 5.63) were predictive of HF. The absolute risk of developing HF was 8.81% for MRI-LVH versus 2.26% for absence of MRI-LVH with a relative risk of 3.9. With ECG-LVH, the absolute risk of developing HF 6.87% compared with 2.69% for absence of ECG-LVH with a relative risk of 2.55. The ability of the model to predict HF was better with MRI-LVH (C-index 0.871, 95% CI 0.842 to 0.899) than with ECG-LVH (C-index 0.860, 95% CI 0.833 to 0.888) (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: ECG-LVH and MRI-LVH are predictive of HF. Substituting MRI-LVH for ECG-LVH improves the predictive ability of a model similar to the FHFRS. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
OBJECTIVE: To determine if there is a significant difference in the predictive abilities of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) detected by ECG-LVH versus LVH ascertained by cardiac MRI-LVH in a model similar to the Framingham Heart Failure Risk Score (FHFRS). METHODS: This study included 4745 (mean age 61±10 years, 53.5% women, 61.7% non-whites) participants in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. ECG-LVH was defined using Cornell voltage product while MRI-LVH was derived from left ventricular mass. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to examine the association between ECG-LVH and MRI-LVH with incident heart failure (HF). Harrell's concordance C-index was used to estimate the predictive ability of the model when either ECG-LVH or MRI-LVH was included as one of its components. RESULTS: ECG-LVH was present in 291 (6.1%), while MRI-LVH was present in 499 (10.5%) of the participants. Both ECG-LVH (HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.69) and MRI-LVH (HR 3.80, 95% CI 1.56 to 5.63) were predictive of HF. The absolute risk of developing HF was 8.81% for MRI-LVH versus 2.26% for absence of MRI-LVH with a relative risk of 3.9. With ECG-LVH, the absolute risk of developing HF 6.87% compared with 2.69% for absence of ECG-LVH with a relative risk of 2.55. The ability of the model to predict HF was better with MRI-LVH (C-index 0.871, 95% CI 0.842 to 0.899) than with ECG-LVH (C-index 0.860, 95% CI 0.833 to 0.888) (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: ECG-LVH and MRI-LVH are predictive of HF. Substituting MRI-LVH for ECG-LVH improves the predictive ability of a model similar to the FHFRS. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Authors: Donald Lloyd-Jones; Robert J Adams; Todd M Brown; Mercedes Carnethon; Shifan Dai; Giovanni De Simone; T Bruce Ferguson; Earl Ford; Karen Furie; Cathleen Gillespie; Alan Go; Kurt Greenlund; Nancy Haase; Susan Hailpern; P Michael Ho; Virginia Howard; Brett Kissela; Steven Kittner; Daniel Lackland; Lynda Lisabeth; Ariane Marelli; Mary M McDermott; James Meigs; Dariush Mozaffarian; Michael Mussolino; Graham Nichol; Véronique L Roger; Wayne Rosamond; Ralph Sacco; Paul Sorlie; Randall Stafford; Thomas Thom; Sylvia Wasserthiel-Smoller; Nathan D Wong; Judith Wylie-Rosett Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-02-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Anders Opdahl; Bharath Ambale Venkatesh; Veronica R S Fernandes; Colin O Wu; Khurram Nasir; Eui-Young Choi; Andre L C Almeida; Boaz Rosen; Benilton Carvalho; Thor Edvardsen; David A Bluemke; João A C Lima Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-07-29 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Aditya Jain; Harikrishna Tandri; Darshan Dalal; Harjit Chahal; Elsayed Z Soliman; Ronald J Prineas; Aaron R Folsom; João A C Lima; David A Bluemke Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Harjit Chahal; David A Bluemke; Colin O Wu; Robyn McClelland; Kiang Liu; Steven J Shea; Gregory Burke; Pelbreton Balfour; David Herrington; PeiBei Shi; Wendy Post; Jean Olson; Karol E Watson; Aaron R Folsom; Joao A C Lima Journal: Heart Date: 2014-11-07 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Shunsuke Natori; Shenghan Lai; J Paul Finn; Antoinette S Gomes; W Gregory Hundley; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Gregory Pearson; Shantanu Sinha; Andrew Arai; Joao A C Lima; David A Bluemke Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Quynh A Truong; Leon M Ptaszek; Elizabeth M Charipar; Carolyn Taylor; Joao D Fontes; Matthias Kriegel; Thomas Irlbeck; Michael Toepker; Christopher L Schlett; Fabian Bamberg; Ron Blankstein; Thomas J Brady; John T Nagurney; Udo Hoffmann Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 4.844
Authors: Hossein Bahrami; Richard Kronmal; David A Bluemke; Jean Olson; Steven Shea; Kiang Liu; Gregory L Burke; João A C Lima Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2008-10-27
Authors: Ljuba Bacharova; Haiying Chen; E Harvey Estes; Anton Mateasik; David A Bluemke; Joao A C Lima; Gregory L Burke; Elsayed Z Soliman Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2014-11-29 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Qingmiao Shao; Lei Meng; Gary Tse; Abhishek C Sawant; Calista Zhuo Yi Chan; George Bazoukis; Adrian Baranchuk; Guangping Li; Tong Liu Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Andrew Van Tosh; Nathaniel Reichek; C David Cooke; Christopher J Palestro; Kenneth J Nichols Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-02-07 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Elsayed Z Soliman; Walter T Ambrosius; William C Cushman; Zhu-Ming Zhang; Jeffrey T Bates; Javier A Neyra; Thaddeus Y Carson; Leonardo Tamariz; Lama Ghazi; Monique E Cho; Brian P Shapiro; Jiang He; Lawrence J Fine; Cora E Lewis Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-05-16 Impact factor: 29.690