Department of Internal Medicine B University Medicine Greifswald Greifswald Germany.
DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Greifswald Greifswald Germany.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Aug 18;9(16):e015630. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.015630. Epub 2020 Aug 4.
Background Common carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) is a biomarker for subclinical atherosclerosis and is associated with all-cause as well as cardiovascular mortality. Higher cIMT is accompanied by a compensatory increase in lumen diameter (LD) of the common carotid arteries. Whether cIMT or LD carry more information with regard to mortality is unclear. Methods and Results A total of 2751 subjects (median age 53 years; 52% female) were included. During a median follow-up of 14.9 years (range: 12.8-16.5) a total of 506 subjects died. At baseline, cIMT and LD were assessed by carotid ultrasound scans. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to relate cIMT, LD, LD adjusted for cIMT (LD+cIMT), and LD/cIMT ratio with all-cause, cardiovascular, and noncardiovascular mortality. All models were ranked using Akaike's information criterion. Harrel's c statistic was used to compare the models' predictive power for mortality. A 1-mm increase in LD was related to a higher risk for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.29; 95% CI, 1.14-1.45, <0.01). This association remained significant when cIMT was added to the model (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.11-1.42; <0.01). A 1-mm higher cIMT was also related with greater mortality risk (HR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.09-2.75). The LD/cIMT ratio was not associated with all-cause mortality. LD had the lowest Akaike's information criterion regarding all-cause mortality and improved all-cause mortality prediction compared with the null model (=0.01). CIMT weakened all-cause mortality prediction compared with the LD model. Conclusions LD provided more information for all-cause mortality compared with cIMT in a large population-based sample.
颈总动脉内膜中层厚度(cIMT)是亚临床动脉粥样硬化的生物标志物,与全因和心血管死亡率均相关。cIMT 升高的同时,颈总动脉管腔直径(LD)会代偿性增大。目前尚不清楚 cIMT 或 LD 与死亡率的相关性哪个更强。
共纳入 2751 例受试者(中位年龄 53 岁,52%为女性)。中位随访 14.9 年(范围 12.8-16.5 年)期间,共有 506 例受试者死亡。基线时通过颈动脉超声评估 cIMT 和 LD。采用多变量 Cox 回归模型分析 cIMT、LD、校正 cIMT 后的 LD(LD+cIMT)和 LD/cIMT 比值与全因、心血管和非心血管死亡率的关系。采用赤池信息量准则(Akaike's information criterion)对所有模型进行排序。Harrell's c 统计量用于比较模型对死亡率的预测能力。LD 每增加 1mm,全因死亡率的风险增加(风险比 [HR],1.29;95%置信区间 [CI],1.14-1.45,<0.01)。当将 cIMT 加入模型时,这种相关性仍然显著(HR,1.26;95%CI,1.11-1.42;<0.01)。cIMT 每增加 1mm,死亡率风险也随之增加(HR,1.73;95%CI,1.09-2.75)。LD/cIMT 比值与全因死亡率无关。LD 与全因死亡率的赤池信息量准则最低,与零模型相比,改善了全因死亡率预测(=0.01)。cIMT 降低了全因死亡率预测的准确性。
在大型基于人群的样本中,与 cIMT 相比,LD 提供了更多与全因死亡率相关的信息。