Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is the most powerful cardiac risk prognosticator in the asymptomatic population, with consistent superiority to all risk factor based paradigms. More recently, the strong prognostic value of changes in CAC has been demonstrated. The application of CAC to asymptomatic patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), all of whom have been presumed to be of high risk, has yielded a range of risks from low to high, proportional to the amount of calcified plaque as in patients without DM. These risks are higher than in nondiabetic patients at corresponding CAC levels, except for those without CAC who have the same low risk as nondiabetic patients. In addition, the value of serial scanning to assess plaque progression and prognosis in persons with DM has been demonstrated. Therefore, we propose that : 1) DM is not a coronary artery disease equivalent; 2) CAC be routinely employed in all asymptomatic diabetic patients older than 40 years as proposed by ACC/AHA guidelines; 3) serial CAC scanning be considered for evaluation of the response to therapy.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Coronary artery disease (CAD) in diabetes mellitus (DM) is often widespread when diagnosed. Non-invasive coronary calcium scoring and coronary CT angiography (CAC-score/CCTA) are accurate in the detection of CAD. This study compared CAD characteristics as identified by CCTA between patients with and without DM with atypical chest pain.
CAD was defined as CAC-score >0 and/or presence of coronary plaque. Several CAD characteristics (number of affected segments, obstructive (>50% stenosis) CAD and CAD distribution) were compared on a per patient and segment basis. Subanalysis of duration of DM (<5 or >5 years) and gender was performed.
A total of 1148 patients (63.3% men, mean age 57.7±10.7), of whom 99 (8.6%) suffered from DM, were referred for CCTA. There was no difference in the prevalence of CAD between patients with and without DM (53.5% vs 50.9%, p=0.674). However patients with DM showed more affected coronary segments compared with patients without DM (2.5±3.4 vs 1.7±2.4, p=0.003). Multivariate analysis indicated that DM was an independent predictor of obstructive CAD (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.78), as were age, women, and Diamond-Forrester score. In our study, obstructive CAD was more prevalent in women than in men (DM 40.0% vs 14.1%, p=0.003; non-DM 16.8% vs 8.4%, p<0.001). Patients suffering from DM >5 years showed more distal plaques (11.2% vs 7.7%, p=0.030).
Patients with atypical chest pain and DM showed more extensive CAD, as well as more obstructive CAD, particularly in women. Diabetes duration (>5 years) was not associated with more obstructive coronary disease or different plaque morphology, although more distal disease was present.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Albuminuria and reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) associate with two apolipoprotein L1 gene (APOL1) variants in nondiabetic African Americans (AAs). Whether APOL1 associates with subclinical atherosclerosis and survival remains unclear. To determine this, 717 African American-Diabetes Heart Study participants underwent computed tomography to determine coronary artery-, carotid artery-, and aorta-calcified atherosclerotic plaque mass scores in addition to the urine albumin:creatinine ratio (UACR), eGFR, and C-reactive protein (CRP). Associations between mass scores and APOL1 were assessed adjusting for age, gender, African ancestry, body mass index (BMI), hemoglobin A1c, smoking, hypertension, use of statins and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, albuminuria, and eGFR. Participants were 58.9% female with mean age 56.5 years, eGFR 89.5 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), UACR 169.6 mg/g, and coronary artery-, carotid artery-, and aorta-calcified plaque mass scores of 610, 171, and 5378, respectively. In fully adjusted models, APOL1 risk variants were significantly associated with lower levels of carotid artery-calcified plaque (β=-0.42, s.e. 0.18; dominant model) and marginally lower coronary artery plaque (β=-0.36, s.e. 0.21; dominant model), but not with aorta-calcified plaque, CRP, UACR, or eGFR. By the end of a mean follow-up of 5.0 years, 89 participants had died. APOL1 nephropathy risk variants were significantly associated with improved survival (hazard ratio 0.67 for one copy; 0.44 for two copies). Thus, APOL1 nephropathy variants associate with lower levels of subclinical atherosclerosis and reduced risk of death in AAs with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Kidney International advance online publication, 23 July 2014; doi:10.1038/ki.2014.255.
Kidney International 07/2014; 87(1). DOI:10.1038/ki.2014.255 · 8.56 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To clarify the frequency and distribution pattern of calcifications in all and in only non-assessable coronary arterial segments in symptomatic patients with coronary heart disease.
Among 2355 consecutive coronary CT angiographies performed using a 320-row ADCT, 1129 studies performed by prospective one-beat scanning without metallic and motion artifacts were evaluated. Frequency and degree of calcification were assessed for each coronary segment. Evaluations were performed in all and in only non-assessable segments, and the results were compared.
Calcified segments were observed in 15.6 % of patients and 2.4 % of segments. The most extensively calcified segments were those in the proximal left anterior descending branch. 1.1 % of all of the segments were not assessable due to calcification, and 90 % of those non-assessable segments had high-grade calcifications. When the calcium score value was 1000 or 2000, the expected frequency of non-assessable segments was 27.5 or 53.5 %, respectively.
There were specific features of the distribution of coronary arterial calcifications. It is important to be familiar with these features when deciding whether or not to perform subtraction CCTA.
Japanese journal of radiology 01/2015; 33(3). DOI:10.1007/s11604-015-0389-2 · 0.84 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.