Beatriz López-Melgar1, Leticia Fernández-Friera2, Belén Oliva3, José Manuel García-Ruiz4, José Luis Peñalvo5, Sandra Gómez-Talavera6, Javier Sánchez-González7, José María Mendiguren8, Borja Ibáñez9, Antonio Fernández-Ortiz10, Javier Sanz11, Valentín Fuster12. 1. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain; HM Hospitales-Centro Integral de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares HM CIEC, Madrid, Spain. 2. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain; HM Hospitales-Centro Integral de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares HM CIEC, Madrid, Spain; CIBER de enfermedades CardioVasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, Spain. 3. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain. 4. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain; CIBER de enfermedades CardioVasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, Spain; Hospital Universitario Central de Oviedo, Asturias, Spain. 5. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain; Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain; IIS-Fundación Jiménez Díaz Hospital, Madrid, Spain. 7. Philips Healthcare, Madrid, Spain. 8. Banco de Santander, Madrid, Spain. 9. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain; CIBER de enfermedades CardioVasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, Spain; IIS-Fundación Jiménez Díaz Hospital, Madrid, Spain. 10. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain; CIBER de enfermedades CardioVasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, Spain; Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain. 11. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain; Zena and Michael A. Wiener Cardiovascular Institute/Marie-Josée and Henry R. Kravis Center for Cardiovascular Health, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York. 12. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain; Zena and Michael A. Wiener Cardiovascular Institute/Marie-Josée and Henry R. Kravis Center for Cardiovascular Health, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York. Electronic address: vfuster@cnic.es.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Detection of subclinical atherosclerosis improves risk prediction beyond cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) and risk scores, but quantification of plaque burden may improve it further. Novel 3-dimensional vascular ultrasound (3DVUS) provides accurate volumetric quantification of plaque burden. OBJECTIVES: The authors evaluated associations between 3DVUS-based plaque burden and CVRFs and explored potential added value over simple plaque detection. METHODS: The authors included 3,860 (92.2%) PESA (Progression of Early Subclinical Atherosclerosis) study participants (age 45.8 ± 4.3 years; 63% men). Bilateral carotid and femoral territories were explored by 3DVUS to determine the number of plaques and territories affected, and to quantify global plaque burden defined as the sum of all plaque volumes. Linear regression and proportional odds models were used to evaluate associations of plaque burden with CVRFs and estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk. RESULTS: Plaque burden was higher in men (63.4 mm3 [interquartile range (IQR): 23.8 to 144.8 mm3] vs. 25.7 mm3 [IQR: 11.5 to 61.6 mm3] in women; p < 0.001), in the femoral territory (64 mm3 [IQR: 27.6 to 140.5 mm3] vs. 23.1 mm3 [IQR: 9.9 to 48.7 mm3] in the carotid territory; p < 0.001), and with increasing age (p < 0.001). Age, sex, smoking, and dyslipidemia were more strongly associated with femoral than with carotid disease burden, whereas hypertension and diabetes showed no territorial differences. Plaque burden was directly associated with estimated cardiovascular risk independently of the number of plaques or territories affected (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: 3DVUS quantifies higher plaque burden in men, in the femoral territory, and with increasing age during midlife. Plaque burden correlates strongly with CVRFs, especially at the femoral level, and reflects estimated cardiovascular risk more closely than plaque detection alone. (Progression of Early Subclinical Atherosclerosis [PESA] Study; NCT01410318).
BACKGROUND: Detection of subclinical atherosclerosis improves risk prediction beyond cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) and risk scores, but quantification of plaque burden may improve it further. Novel 3-dimensional vascular ultrasound (3DVUS) provides accurate volumetric quantification of plaque burden. OBJECTIVES: The authors evaluated associations between 3DVUS-based plaque burden and CVRFs and explored potential added value over simple plaque detection. METHODS: The authors included 3,860 (92.2%) PESA (Progression of Early Subclinical Atherosclerosis) study participants (age 45.8 ± 4.3 years; 63% men). Bilateral carotid and femoral territories were explored by 3DVUS to determine the number of plaques and territories affected, and to quantify global plaque burden defined as the sum of all plaque volumes. Linear regression and proportional odds models were used to evaluate associations of plaque burden with CVRFs and estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk. RESULTS: Plaque burden was higher in men (63.4 mm3 [interquartile range (IQR): 23.8 to 144.8 mm3] vs. 25.7 mm3 [IQR: 11.5 to 61.6 mm3] in women; p < 0.001), in the femoral territory (64 mm3 [IQR: 27.6 to 140.5 mm3] vs. 23.1 mm3 [IQR: 9.9 to 48.7 mm3] in the carotid territory; p < 0.001), and with increasing age (p < 0.001). Age, sex, smoking, and dyslipidemia were more strongly associated with femoral than with carotid disease burden, whereas hypertension and diabetes showed no territorial differences. Plaque burden was directly associated with estimated cardiovascular risk independently of the number of plaques or territories affected (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: 3DVUS quantifies higher plaque burden in men, in the femoral territory, and with increasing age during midlife. Plaque burden correlates strongly with CVRFs, especially at the femoral level, and reflects estimated cardiovascular risk more closely than plaque detection alone. (Progression of Early Subclinical Atherosclerosis [PESA] Study; NCT01410318).
Authors: Gerald F Watts; Samuel S Gidding; Pedro Mata; Jing Pang; David R Sullivan; Shizuya Yamashita; Frederick J Raal; Raul D Santos; Kausik K Ray Journal: Nat Rev Cardiol Date: 2020-01-23 Impact factor: 32.419
Authors: Maria Noflatscher; Michael Schreinlechner; Philip Sommer; Philipp Deutinger; Markus Theurl; Rudolf Kirchmair; Axel Bauer; Peter Marschang Journal: Nutrients Date: 2020-11-30 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Marta Agudiez; Paula J Martinez; Marta Martin-Lorenzo; Angeles Heredero; Aranzazu Santiago-Hernandez; Dolores Molero; Juan Manuel Garcia-Segura; Gonzalo Aldamiz-Echevarria; Gloria Alvarez-Llamas Journal: BMC Biol Date: 2020-12-14 Impact factor: 7.431
Authors: Marcelino Bermúdez-López; Manuel Martí-Antonio; Eva Castro-Boqué; María Del Mar Bretones; Cristina Farràs; Gerard Torres; Reinald Pamplona; Albert Lecube; Dídac Mauricio; José Manuel Valdivielso; Elvira Fernández Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-07-14