Herath Herath Mudiyanselage Meththananda, Weerarathna Thilak Priyantha, Dulanjalee Ranasinghe Bethmi Arachige Thilini, Jayawardana Madumekala Rupasinghe, Edirisingha Udara Priyadarshani, Rathnayake Madushanka
Senior Lecturer, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Galle University of Ruhuna , Srilanka .
Professor, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Galle University of Ruhuna , Galle, Srilanka .
J Clin Diagn Res. 2016 Jul;10(7):OC09-12. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/19356.8087. Epub 2016 Jul 1.
Risk assessment tools used to calculate the Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) risk such as the Framingham Risk Score (FRS), United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes study (UKPDS) risk engine and the World Health Organization (WHO) risk score have not been tested on their ability to detect subclinical atherosclerosis in most developing countries.
To study the association between the calculated CVD risk scores using each of these tools and Carotid Intima Medial Thickness (CIMT), a surrogate marker of atherosclerosis, in a group of patients with Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in Sri Lanka.
We calculated CVD risk scores of 68 randomly selected patients with T2DM with no history or symptoms of CVD and measured their CIMT using B-mode ultrasonography (USS). Carotid USS was considered positive when the maximum carotid IMT was 0.9mm or when arteriosclerotic plaques were detected. The 10-year CVD risk was calculated using the FRS, the UKPDS risk engine and the WHO risk score. Pearson correlation was used to study the association between CVD risk scores with CIMT.
Of the 68 patients studied, 50% were males and their mean age (SD) was 56.9 (±9.6) years. The mean age at onset and duration of diabetes were 44.3(±9.1) and 12.2(±7.6) years respectively. Of the scoring methods, UKPDS tool had weak, but significantly positive (r = 0.26, p < 0.05) and FRS had positive but not significant association (r= 0. 21) with CIMT. There was a negative association between CIMT and WHO risk score (r= - 0.07).
Of the three CVD risk assessment tools, both UKPDS risk engine and FRS have almost equal ability (former being marginally superior) in predicting underlying atherosclerotic vascular disease in patients with T2DM. Negative association of the WHO risk score with CIMT argues against its utility for CVD screening. These findings highlight the need for developing more sensitive and reliable CVD risk assessment tools for developing countries.
用于计算心血管疾病(CVD)风险的风险评估工具,如弗雷明汉风险评分(FRS)、英国前瞻性糖尿病研究(UKPDS)风险引擎和世界卫生组织(WHO)风险评分,在大多数发展中国家尚未对其检测亚临床动脉粥样硬化的能力进行测试。
在斯里兰卡一组2型糖尿病(T2DM)患者中,研究使用这些工具各自计算的CVD风险评分与动脉粥样硬化替代标志物颈动脉内膜中层厚度(CIMT)之间的关联。
我们计算了68例随机选择的无CVD病史或症状的T2DM患者的CVD风险评分,并使用B型超声(USS)测量他们的CIMT。当最大颈动脉IMT为0.9mm或检测到动脉粥样硬化斑块时,颈动脉USS被认为是阳性。使用FRS、UKPDS风险引擎和WHO风险评分计算10年CVD风险。采用Pearson相关性分析研究CVD风险评分与CIMT之间的关联。
在研究的68例患者中,50%为男性,他们的平均年龄(标准差)为56.9(±9.6)岁。糖尿病发病的平均年龄和病程分别为44.3(±9.1)岁和12.2(±7.6)年。在评分方法中,UKPDS工具与CIMT呈弱但显著正相关(r = 0.26,p < 0.05),FRS与CIMT呈正相关但不显著(r = 0.21)。CIMT与WHO风险评分之间存在负相关(r = - 0.07)。
在这三种CVD风险评估工具中,UKPDS风险引擎和FRS在预测T2DM患者潜在的动脉粥样硬化性血管疾病方面能力几乎相当(前者略优)。WHO风险评分与CIMT的负相关表明其不适用于CVD筛查。这些发现凸显了为发展中国家开发更敏感、可靠的CVD风险评估工具的必要性。