Wong Nathan D, Kawakubo Miwa, LaBree Laurie, Azen Stanley P, Xiang Min, Detrano Robert
Heart Disease Prevention Program, Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, California, USA.
Am J Cardiol. 2004 Aug 15;94(4):431-6. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.05.003.
Tracking of coronary artery calcium (CAC) has been suggested for monitoring the effects of lipid control, but it is not known whether lipid control decreases progression of CAC. Seven hundred sixty-one subjects (mean age 64.5 +/- 7.3 years; 91% men; 69% positive for CAC) in an ongoing cohort study underwent baseline and follow-up (after 7.0 +/- 0.5 years) computed tomography for CAC. Subjects were stratified into low-risk (<2 risk factors), intermediate-risk (> or =2 risk factors but <20% risk of coronary heart disease over 10 years), or high-risk (> or =2 risk factors and >20% risk of coronary heart disease in 10 years or diabetes) groups. Lipid control was defined according to criteria of the National Cholesterol Education Program. Two-way analysis of covariance was used to examine the relation of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and risk group to change in CAC volume score. Control of levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and triglycerides was also examined in relation to progression of CAC. After adjustment for other risk factors and baseline CAC volume, CAC progression was similar between those with adequate and those with inadequate control of LDL cholesterol (p = 0.68) and across categories of optimal, intermediate, and higher risk LDL cholesterol (p = 0.40). However, higher levels of HDL cholesterol (> or =1.5 mmol/L [60 mg/dl]) were associated with less progression of CAC volume (151 vs 203 mm(3) in those with HDL cholesterol <1.0 mmol/L [40 mg/dl], p = 0.03). There was no relation between triglycerides and CAC progression (p = 0.54). Our findings do not support the use of CAC assessment for monitoring the control of LDL cholesterol, but greater progression of CAC may occur in those in whom HDL cholesterol is not controlled.
有人建议通过追踪冠状动脉钙化(CAC)来监测血脂控制的效果,但目前尚不清楚血脂控制是否能减缓CAC的进展。在一项正在进行的队列研究中,761名受试者(平均年龄64.5±7.3岁;91%为男性;69%的CAC呈阳性)接受了基线和随访(7.0±0.5年后)的CAC计算机断层扫描。受试者被分为低风险组(<2个风险因素)、中风险组(≥2个风险因素但10年内冠心病风险<20%)或高风险组(≥2个风险因素且10年内冠心病风险>20%或患有糖尿病)。血脂控制根据国家胆固醇教育计划的标准进行定义。采用双向协方差分析来检验低密度脂蛋白(LDL)胆固醇和风险组与CAC体积评分变化之间的关系。还研究了高密度脂蛋白(HDL)胆固醇和甘油三酯水平的控制与CAC进展的关系。在对其他风险因素和基线CAC体积进行调整后,LDL胆固醇控制良好和控制不佳的患者之间的CAC进展相似(p = 0.68),在最佳、中等和较高风险的LDL胆固醇类别中也是如此(p = 0.40)。然而,较高水平的HDL胆固醇(≥1.5 mmol/L [60 mg/dl])与CAC体积进展较少相关(HDL胆固醇<1.0 mmol/L [40 mg/dl]的患者中为151 vs 203 mm³,p = 0.03)。甘油三酯与CAC进展之间没有关系(p = 0.54)。我们的研究结果不支持使用CAC评估来监测LDL胆固醇的控制情况,但HDL胆固醇未得到控制的患者可能会出现更大程度的CAC进展。