| Literature DB >> 31273013 |
Richard S Liu1,2, Sophie Dunn2,3, Anneke C Grobler1,2, Katherine Lange1,2, Denise Becker2,4, Greta Goldsmith2, John B Carlin2,4, Markus Juonala5,6, Melissa Wake1,2,7, David P Burgner1,2,8.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe a well-established marker of cardiovascular risk, carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) and related measures (artery distensibility and elasticity) in children aged 11-12 years old and mid-life adults, and examine associations within parent-child dyads.Entities:
Keywords: children; distensibility; epidemiological studies; inheritance patterns; intima-media thickness; reference values
Year: 2019 PMID: 31273013 PMCID: PMC6624035 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020264
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1Participant flow chart. n, number of families; c, number of children; p, number of attending adults; MAC, main assessment centre; mAC, mini assessment centre; HV, home visit assessment; LSAC, Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. *Unable to assess due to equipment failure, poor quality data or time contraints. ∧Data from 13 non-biological child-parent pairs excluded from concordance analyses.
Figure 2Sample single frame of ultrasound obtained in CheckPoint, with Carotid Analyzer analysis overlayed. Yellow lines indicate the lumen–intima interface, pink lines indicate the media–adventitia interface. The distance between yellow and pink lines in the lower pair of lines (far wall) is the carotid intima–media thickness. The carotid bulb characteristics are demonstrated in the left edge of the image.
Sample characteristics, stratified by sex, of children and parents
| Child | All | Boys | Girls | ||||||
| Characteristics | N | Mean* | SD* | N | Mean* | SD* | N | Mean* | SD* |
| Age, years | 1489 | 12.0 | 0.4 | 745 | 12.0 | 0.4 | 744 | 12.0 | 0.4 |
| Height, cm | 1488 | 153.2 | 7.9 | 744 | 152.5 | 8.0 | 744 | 153.9 | 7.8 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 1488 | 19.4 | 3.6 | 744 | 19.3 | 3.5 | 744 | 19.6 | 3.6 |
| BMI z-score (CDC) | 1488 | 0.37 | 1.02 | 744 | 0.37 | 1.02 | 744 | 0.37 | 1.01 |
| Waist, cm | 1488 | 66.6 | 8.7 | 744 | 67.3 | 8.8 | 744 | 65.8 | 8.5 |
| SBP, mm Hg | 1371 | 108.6 | 8.0 | 673 | 108.4 | 7.8 | 698 | 108.9 | 8.2 |
| DBP, mm Hg | 1371 | 63.1 | 5.6 | 673 | 62.7 | 5.7 | 698 | 63.5 | 5.4 |
| Disadvantage Index | 1485 | 1010 | 63 | 742 | 1008 | 63 | 743 | 1011 | 63 |
| Lumen diameter, mm | 1419 | 4.9 | 0.4 | 708 | 5.0 | 0.4 | 711 | 4.7 | 0.4 |
N, number of participants in cohort with this measure (denominator).
Disadvantage Index: the Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage.
*Weighted mean, SD and percentage.
BMI, body mass index; CDC, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; SBP, systolic blood pressure.
Distribution of carotid intima–media thickness (IMT), distensibility and elasticity in children and parents
| Child characteristics | All | Boys | Girls | |||||||||
| N | Mean | SD | 95% CI | N | Mean | SD | 95% CI | N | Mean | SD | 95% CI | |
| Far wall mean IMT, mm | 1485 | 0.50 | 0.06 | 0.49 to 0.50 | 743 | 0.50 | 0.06 | 0.50 to 0.51 | 742 | 0.49 | 0.06 | 0.49 to 0.50 |
| Far wall maximum IMT, mm | 1485 | 0.58 | 0.05 | 0.58 to 0.59 | 743 | 0.59 | 0.05 | 0.58 to 0.59 | 742 | 0.58 | 0.05 | 0.57 to 0.58 |
| Carotid artery distensibility, % | 1419 | 17.4 | 3.2 | 17.2 to 17.6 | 708 | 17.1 | 3.0 | 16.8 to 17.3 | 711 | 17.7 | 3.3 | 17.4 to 18.0 |
| Carotid artery elasticity, %/mm Hg | 1312 | 0.48 | 0.09 | 0.47 to 0.48 | 641 | 0.47 | 0.08 | 0.46 to 0.48 | 671 | 0.49 | 0.09 | 0.48 to 0.50 |
N, number of participants in cohort with this measure.
Figure 3Density plots for each primary and secondary carotid artery outcome. Males (blue), females (red) and both sexes (thin dotted black line) plotted on the same graph for each outcome. X and Y scales common between child and parent, and between mean and maximum IMT variables. IMT, intima–media thickness.
Parent–child concordance in weighted analyses
| Pearson’s correlation | All parents | Mothers | Fathers | ||||||
| N | CC | 95% CI | N | CC | 95% CI | N | CC | 95% CI | |
| Far wall mean IMT | 1437 | 0.09 | 0.02 to 0.16 | 1245 | 0.12 | 0.05 to 0.23 | 192 | 0.01 | −0.13 to 0.14 |
| Far wall maximum IMT | 1437 | 0.08 | 0.01 to 0.15 | 1245 | 0.10 | 0.03 to 0.21 | 192 | 0.05 | −0.09 to 0.18 |
| Carotid artery distensibility | 1255 | 0.18 | 0.10 to 0.23 | 1105 | 0.19 | 0.10 to 0.25 | 150 | 0.17 | −0.05 to 0.37 |
| Carotid artery elasticity | 1133 | 0.11 | 0.03 to 0.19 | 1003 | 0.11 | 0.02 to 0.18 | 130 | 0.28 | 0.01 to 0.63 |
Non-biological caregivers were excluded from these analyses (n=13). Covariates in adjusted linear regression models include parent and child age, parent and child height, child lumen diameter (for carotid IMT only), Disadvantage Index and child sex.
Disadvantage Index: the Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage.
N: number of participants in cohort with this measure.
CC, correlation coefficient; ERC, estimated regression coefficient; IMT, intima–media thickness.