(Stroke. 2001;32:1532.)
© 2001 American Heart Association, Inc.
Original Contributions |
From the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam (A.I. del S., M.H., A.H., D.E.G., M.M.B.B., J.C.M.W., M.L.B.); Julius Center for Patient Oriented Research, University Medical Center Utrecht (A.I. del S., K.G.M.M., D.E.G., M.L.B.); and Department of Neurology, University Hospital Rotterdam (P.J.K.) (Netherlands).
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
MethodsWe used data from a nested case-control study comprising 374 subjects with either an incident stroke or a myocardial infarction and 1496 controls. All subjects were aged 55 years and older and participated in the Rotterdam Study. Mean follow-up was 4.2 years (range, 0.1 to 6.5 years). We evaluated which correlates of coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease contribute to the prediction of either a new incident myocardial infarction or a stroke. Logistic regression modeling and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC area) were used to quantify the predictive value of the established risk factors and the added value of IMT.
ResultsThe ROC area of a model with age and sex only was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.69). Independent risk factors were previous myocardial infarction and stroke, diabetes mellitus, smoking, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and total and HDL cholesterol levels. These risk factors increased the ROC area from 0.65 to 0.72 (95% CI, 0.69 to 0.75). This model correctly predicted 17% of all subjects with coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease. When common carotid IMT was added to the previous model, the ROC area increased to 0.75 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.78). When only the IMT measurement was used, the ROC area was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.74), and 14% of all subjects were correctly predicted. There was no difference in ROC area when different measurement sites were used.
ConclusionsAdding IMT to a risk function for coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease does not result in a substantial increase in the predictive value when used as a screening tool.
Key Words: atherosclerosis cardiovascular diseases carotid arteries risk factors ultrasonics
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The objective of the present study is to evaluate, in elderly subjects of the general population, which established risk factors, such as medical history, blood pressure, and serum lipids, are independent predictors of coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease and whether measurement of carotid IMT contributes to the prediction of coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease when added to these risk factors. Eventually, we evaluated the predictive ability of the carotid IMT measurement alone when used to replace established risk factors.
| Subjects and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Cerebrovascular and
Cardiovascular Risk Indicators
At baseline, information about the medical history of
myocardial infarction and stroke, current medication, alcohol intake,
and smoking habits was obtained by a trained research assistant. At the
study center an extensive physical examination was performed, including
height and weight measurement, 2 blood pressure measurements (taken
with a random zero sphygmomanometer with the subject in sitting
position, and averaged), a 12-lead ECG, serum total
cholesterol and HDL cholesterol levels, and a
nonfasting or postload glucose level.
Presence of hypertension was defined as a systolic
pressure
160 mm Hg or a diastolic pressure
95 mm Hg or current use of blood pressurelowering drugs for
the indication of hypertension. Diabetes mellitus was considered
present when subjects currently used oral blood glucoselowering
drugs or insulin or had a nonfasting or postload glucose level
>11 mmol/L, assessed after a nonfasting
venipuncture.
Incident Cerebrovascular and
Cardiovascular Disease
Information on incident fatal and nonfatal events is
obtained from the general practitioners working in the
district of Ommoord. The general practitioners report all
possible cases of myocardial infarction and stroke to the Rotterdam
research center. Events are coded according to the International
Classification of Primary
Care.10 Information on the
vital status of the participants is obtained at regular intervals from
the municipal authorities in Rotterdam. When an event or death has been
reported, additional information is obtained by scrutinizing
information from general practitioner and hospital
discharge records in case of admittance or referral. Events are
then confirmed by 2 study physicians. Additionally, all data about new
cases of myocardial infarction were reviewed by a cardiologist, and all
data about stroke cases were reviewed by a neurologist; neither
physician actually saw the patient. In case of disagreement, consensus
was reached in additional meetings. An incident myocardial infarction
was considered to have occurred when the event led to a hospitalization
and the hospital discharge record indicated a diagnosis of a new
myocardial infarction on the basis of signs and symptoms, ECG
recordings, and repeated laboratory investigations during
hospital stay. All suspected cerebrovascular events reported by the
general practitioners were submitted for review to a
neurologist (P.J.K.). The neurologist classified the events as
definite, probable, and possible stroke on the basis of all
information, including symptoms and signs obtained by interviewing the
general practitioner or, in case of hospital referral,
hospital data. An incident stroke was considered to have occurred when
(1) the event had led to a hospitalization and the hospital discharge
record indicated a diagnosis of a new stroke; the clinical
diagnosis was based on signs, symptoms, and neuroimaging investigations
during hospital stay; or (2) in case of no hospitalization, signs and
symptoms associated with the event obtained from the general
practitioner were highly suggestive of a stroke according
to the neurologist (probable stroke); or (3) in case of out-of-hospital
death, when the general practitioner reported that the
cause of death was a cerebrovascular accident and a cardiac cause was
judged to be highly unlikely. For the analyses, only definite
and probable incident strokes were included.
Measurement of IMT
To measure carotid IMT, ultrasonography of the common
carotid artery (CCA), carotid bifurcation, and internal carotid artery
(ICA) of the left and right carotid arteries was performed with a
7.5-MHz linear-array transducer (ATL Ultra-Mark IV). On a longitudinal,
2-dimensional ultrasound image of the carotid artery, the anterior
(near) and posterior (far) walls of the carotid artery are displayed as
2 bright white lines separated by a hypoechogenic space. The distance
between the leading edge of the first bright line of the far wall and
the leading edge of the second bright line indicates the IMT. For the
near wall, the distance between the trailing edge of the first bright
line and the trailing edge of the second bright line at the near wall
provides the best estimate of the near wall
IMT.11 In accordance with
the Rotterdam Study ultrasound
protocol,12 a careful search
was performed to obtain the optimal representation of both the
near and far walls of the distal CCA, the carotid bifurcation, and the
ICA. When an optimal longitudinal image was obtained, it was frozen on
the R wave of the ECG and stored on videotape. The actual measurements
of IMT were performed offline. From videotape, the frozen images were
digitized on the screen of a personal computer with the use of
additional dedicated software. This procedure has been described in
detail
previously.13 14
In short, with a cursor, or automatically by the computer, the
interfaces of the CCA were marked across a length of 10 mm. The
computer then calculated the mean IMT and the maximum IMT over the
marked length for both near and far walls. We used the average of the
measurements of 3 frozen images of both the left and right arteries to
obtain mean values of the mean and the maximum thickness for each
subject. For the carotid bifurcation and the ICA, the interfaces were
marked across a variable length at the thickest part of the
measurement site. Then the maximum IMT was calculated over the marked
length. For the analyses, the maximum carotid IMT was
determined as the mean of the maximum IMT of near and far wall
measurements of both the left and right arteries. A composite measure
that combined the maximal CCA IMT, the maximal bifurcation IMT, and the
maximal ICA IMT, when available, was obtained by averaging the 3
measurements after standardization (subject maximum IMT minus cohort
mean of the maximum IMT, divided by cohort SD of the maximum IMT). The
readers of the ultrasound images were unaware of the case status of the
subject. Results from a reproducibility study of IMT measurements of
the CCA among 80 participants of the Rotterdam Study who underwent a
second ultrasound of both carotid arteries within 3 months of the first
scan have been described
elsewhere.15 In short, mean
differences (SD) in far wall IMT of the CCA between paired measurements
of sonographers, readers, and visits were 0.005 (0.09), 0.060 (0.05),
and 0.033 mm (0.12), respectively. Corresponding intraclass
correlation coefficients were 0.63, 0.88, and 0.74,
respectively.
Selection of Cases and Controls
Ultrasonography of the carotid arteries was performed
in 5965 of the 7983 subjects in the Rotterdam Study. For subjects who
had their baseline examination at the end of 1992 and in 1993,
ultrasonography could not always be performed because of the restricted
availability of ultrasonographers. Since this may be considered a
random sample, for the present study the cases and controls were
drawn from this cohort of 5965 subjects. For reasons of availability
and completeness of information on coronary heart and cerebrovascular
events, we restricted the present study to follow-up events
registered by general practitioners before May 1996. The
mean duration of follow-up was 4.2 years (range, 0.1 to 6.5 years; SD,
1.6). We selected 374 case subjects with incident coronary heart
disease and cerebrovascular disease, of whom 194 subjects had a
myocardial infarction and 191 subjects had a stroke (11 subjects had
both a myocardial infarction and a stroke, for which we used the event
that occurred first). For these subjects, data on carotid IMT were
obtained from the stored images on videotape. For each case subject, 4
control subjects were drawn. A subject was eligible as a control if
he/she was free from myocardial infarction and stroke. The total number
of control subjects was 1496, resulting in a total number of 1870
subjects.
Data Analysis
First, data analysis was separately performed
for the 2 outcomes (myocardial infarction and stroke) with the same
control group. Only subjects with complete data on all risk factors and
CCA IMT measurement were included, resulting in a data set of 1721
subjects: 328 cases (174 myocardial infarctions and 165 strokes; 11 had
both) and 1393 controls. The association between each risk factor and
myocardial infarction was quantified by logistic regression
analyses, with adjustment for age and sex. The odds ratio (OR)
and 95% CI were used as measure of association. Variables
associated with myocardial infarction
(P<0.10) were then included in
a multivariate logistic regression model to evaluate
the independent contribution in the prediction of myocardial
infarction. The first (overall) model included all
"univariately" (ie, age and sex adjusted) significant
variables from medical history and physical examination. Model
reduction was performed by excluding variables that were not
significantly related with myocardial infarction (OR with
P<0.10) from the overall
model. Subsequently, the reduced model was extended with carotid IMT
measurements to evaluate their added value in the prediction of
myocardial infarction. Differences in predictive value between all
different prediction models (overall, reduced, and extended) were
estimated by comparison of the area under the receiver operating
characteristic curve (ROC area) with standard
error.16 17 The
ROC curve of a multivariate logistic model plots the
sensitivity and 1-specificity at each consecutive threshold in the
range of predicted probabilities of the model. The ROC area is a
measure of the discriminative or predictive ability of the model that
can range from 0.5 (no discrimination between subjects with and without
myocardial infarction) to 1.0 (perfect discrimination). In all model
comparisons, correlation between the models was taken into account
because they were based on the same
cases.18
The ROC area reflects the overall added value of a model and does not directly indicate its clinical value.19 20 Therefore, we additionally estimated for the final model the absolute number of correctly predicted patients with and without myocardial infarction. A similar analytical approach was followed for stroke as outcome and for the combined coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease outcome (both myocardial infarction and stroke).
A different analysis was performed to evaluate any differences in the predictive value for total coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease (ie, myocardial infarction or stroke) between 3 IMT measurement sites and the combined IMT measure with the use of logistic regression analyses in combination with ROC curves. This analysis was done on a restricted data set with complete data for all 3 measurement sites, resulting in a data set of 512 subjects: 156 cases (74 myocardial infarctions and 74 strokes; 8 subjects had both) and 356 controls. Data on IMT at the carotid bifurcation were available in 64% of the 1870 subjects (74% of all myocardial infarction and stroke cases and 61% of controls); data on IMT of the ICA were available in 31% (47% of all cases and 27% of controls); and data on IMT of the CCA were available in 96% (92% of all cases and 97% of controls).
All analyses were performed with the use of SPSS software, version 9.0 (SPSS Inc).
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Table 3
shows, for outcomes of both myocardial
infarction and stroke, the ORs of the independent predictors in 2
predictive models. Model 1 has the independent predictors added, such
as previous coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease,
diabetes mellitus, smoking, systolic and diastolic
blood pressure, and total and HDL cholesterol. Model 2 is
the same model extended with the CCA IMT. For both outcomes almost the
same independent predictors were found, except for blood lipids, which
were not independent predictors of stroke. In the prediction of
myocardial infarction, the ROC area of model 1 was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.72
to 0.79), whereas for the prediction of stroke it was 0.73 (95% CI,
0.69 to 0.77). Because for both outcomes the independent predictors
were virtually the same and the ROC areas were also similar, we decided
to combine myocardial infarction and stroke as one combined coronary
heart disease and cerebrovascular disease outcome. For the prediction
of this combined outcome, a model with age and sex only reached a ROC
area of 0.65 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.69). The ROC area of model 1
(Table 3
) increased significantly
(P=0.01) from 0.65 to 0.72
(95% CI, 0.69 to 0.75). When CCA IMT was added to model 1
(Table 3
) for the prediction of the combined outcome (model
2), there was a significant increase
(P=0.01) from 0.72 to 0.75
(95% CI, 0.72 to 0.78). When model 3, a model with age, sex, and CCA
IMT only, was used instead of model 2, the ROC area increased
(P=0.01) from 0.65 to 0.71
(95% CI, 0.68 to 0.74).
|
In a subgroup analysis on 512 subjects (156 cases
and 356 controls), we then evaluated the added contribution of each of
the 4 IMT measurements in the prediction of the combined outcome by
separately adding them to model 1
(Table 4
). In this subset the ROC area of model 1 was
0.72 (95% CI, 0.67 to 0.77). This was increased
(P=0.07) to 0.74 (95% CI, 0.69
to 0.78) when CCA IMT was added to model 1, to 0.74 (95% CI, 0.69 to
0.78) (P=0.07) when bifurcation
IMT was added, to 0.75 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.79)
(P=0.01) when ICA IMT was
added, and to 0.75 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.80) when the combined IMT
measurement was added. The CCA IMT was used for the remainder of the
analyses because the increase in ROC area for the different
sites did not differ substantially and because it was available for
95% of all 1870 subjects.
|
To evaluate the difference in predictive value between the
model with all independent predictors (model 1) and a model with only
CCA IMT added to age and sex (model 3), we obtained an estimate of
absolute incidences in the total cohort of the combined outcome
(coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease) across categories
of the models predicted probability. Initially, the absolute
incidence was set by the case-control ratio of 1:4, giving 25%.
Therefore, all subjects in the control group were given a weight that
was the inverse of the sampling fraction. The sampling fraction was
calculated by dividing 1496 controls by the cohort of 5965 subjects
minus 374 cases, giving a sampling fraction of 0.27 and a weight of
3.74. Hence, a new data set was created that included all cases and the
weighted control group resembling the entire cohort.
Table 5
shows the estimated distribution of subjects
with and without coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease,
across selected probability categories of both models 1 and 3. From
this table one can directly obtain the predictive value for presence or
absence of coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease per
probability category (reading horizontally). For model 1, for example,
of all 3048 subjects with an estimated probability
5%, 84 subjects
had coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease and 2964 did
not, yielding a predictive value of coronary heart disease and
cerebrovascular disease presence of 84/3048=2.8% and of coronary heart
disease and cerebrovascular disease absence of 97.2%. Of 119 subjects
with an estimated probability
21%, 25 subjects experienced an event
and 94 did not, a predictive value of coronary heart disease and
cerebrovascular disease presence of 25/119=21%. For model 3, of all
3081 subjects with an estimated probability
5%, 82 subjects
experienced a coronary heart or cerebrovascular event, a predictive
value for coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease presence
of 2.4%. In the category
21%, the predictive value for presence of
coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease was 20%.
Table 5
also enables estimation of the sensitivity and
specificity at different probability thresholds (reading vertically).
Therefore, a threshold probability must be used above which the
probability, as estimated by the model, is considered a "positive"
test result. For example, when model 1 is used at an arbitrary
threshold probability of 15%, it can be seen that of all 308 (189+119)
subjects with a
16% risk of coronary heart disease and
cerebrovascular disease, 53 (28+25) indeed had a myocardial infarction
or stroke, correctly predicting 17% (9%+8%) of all coronary heart
disease and cerebrovascular disease patients (ie, the sensitivity or
true positive rate), while 255 (161+94) did not, so that only 5%
(3%+2%) of all subjects were without coronary heart disease and
cerebrovascular disease (ie, 1-specificity or false-positive
rate), a specificity of 95%. Using the same threshold of 15% when
using carotid IMT (model 3) showed that of all 231 (128+103) subjects
with a
16% risk, 48 (27+21) indeed experienced a coronary heart or
cerebrovascular event (a sensitivity of 14%), while 183 (101+82) did
not, resulting in 4% false-positives and a specificity of 96%.
Similarly, sensitivity and specificity can be calculated for different
threshold probabilities.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To appreciate the results of the present
analysis, some aspects need to be discussed. First, the
estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values apply to a
prognostic setting, with a low baseline risk of the disease, and should
not be confused with (the usually much higher) estimates obtained from
a diagnostic setting, in which the a priori chance of
having the disease under study is much higher. We showed that
established risk factors correctly classified 17% of all subjects with
coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease, while the carotid
IMT measurement correctly classified 14%. Thus, performing only a
carotid IMT measurement leads to a 3% reduction in correctly
predicting the presence of coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular
disease. Although the value of carotid IMT as a proxy of
atherosclerosis in epidemiological studies is without
debate, in daily practice carotid IMT measurement is still a time- and
money-consuming investigation, which is not easily performed in primary
care. Therefore, its value as a screening tool seems to be limited.
Second, CCA IMT was measured only once at baseline. Although studies
indicate good reproducibility, automatic edge-detection computer
programs may further reduce the measurement error as well as duplicate
measurements may. Third, the present analysis was
restricted to those 95% of all subjects with complete data on all risk
indicators and carotid IMT measurements. It is not likely that the
found associations would be different if all those with missing data
were not excluded, since there was no reason to believe that the risk
indicators and ultrasonography were obtained from a selected sample of
the study cohort. This is further exemplified by the analyses
on the restricted data set in which the ROC areas were virtually the
same. Fourth, because of the case-control design of the present
study, the ORs (regression coefficients) of the predictors are
correctly estimated, whereas a baseline risk of coronary heart disease
and cerebrovascular disease (ie, the intercept or constant of a model)
could not be directly estimated. Therefore, we applied a weighting
procedure to the control group to obtain
Table 5
. If one desires to estimate the absolute risk for
subjects in a different population, one can directly use the (adjusted)
regression coefficients (Table 3
), although one must first adjust the
constant for the prevalence of coronary heart disease and
cerebrovascular disease in the population at hand.
In several studies a high carotid IMT was related to future coronary heart and cerebrovascular events.4 5 7 Despite the different ultrasound protocols used in these studies, the results for the CCA IMT are remarkably similar. The OR per SD increase in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study for coronary heart disease was 1.92 (95% CI, 1.66 to 2.22) for women and 1.32 (95% CI, 1.13 to 1.54) for men. In the Cardiovascular Health Study, the relative risk for coronary heart disease and stroke as a combined outcome was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.25 to 1.45). In the Rotterdam Study, the ORs were1.41 (95% CI, 1.25 to 1.82) for stroke and 1.43 (95% CI, 1.16 to 1.78) for myocardial infarction. Recently, Touboul et al21 found, in cross-sectional analyses on data from the Étude du Profil Génétique de lInfarctus Cérébral (GÉNIC) study, that an increased CCA IMT was associated with brain infarctions, both overall and in the main subtypes. In all studies, including the present one, the association remained when coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease risk factors were accounted for.
In conclusion, the present study indicates that a single carotid IMT measurement is of the same importance as commonly used risk factors in the prediction of coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease. Relative to the other easily obtainable and established risk factors, it does not add substantially when used as a screening tool to discriminate subjects with high and low risk of coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Received December 5, 2000; revision received March 21, 2001; accepted March 22, 2001.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R. Telles, C. Lanna, G. Ferreira, A. Souza, T. Navarro, and A. Ribeiro Carotid atherosclerotic alterations in systemic lupus erythematosus patients treated at a Brazilian university setting Lupus, February 1, 2008; 17(2): 105 - 113. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. H. Johnsen, E. B. Mathiesen, O. Joakimsen, E. Stensland, T. Wilsgaard, M.-L. Lochen, I. Njolstad, and E. Arnesen Carotid Atherosclerosis Is a Stronger Predictor of Myocardial Infarction in Women Than in Men: A 6-Year Follow-Up Study of 6226 Persons: The Tromso Study Stroke, November 1, 2007; 38(11): 2873 - 2880. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. D. Barth and C. K. Roberts Carotid intima-media thickness and coronary atherosclerosis: weak or strong relations? Eur. Heart J., October 2, 2007; 28(20): 2552 - 2552. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Femia, M. Kozakova, M. Nannipieri, C. Gonzales-Villalpando, M. P. Stern, S. M. Haffner, and E. Ferrannini Carotid Intima-Media Thickness in Confirmed Prehypertensive Subjects: Predictors and Progression Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., October 1, 2007; 27(10): 2244 - 2249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. A. van Klei, C. J. Kalkman, and K. G. M. Moons Predictive Performance of Three Multivariate Difficult Tracheal Intubation Models: A Double-Blind, Case-Control Study Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2006; 103(6): 1579 - 1581. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E Seyahi, S Ugurlu, R Cumali, H Balci, N Seyahi, S Yurdakul, and H Yazici Atherosclerosis in Takayasu arteritis Ann Rheum Dis, September 1, 2006; 65(9): 1202 - 1207. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. M. Dijk, Y. van der Graaf, M. L. Bots, D. E. Grobbee, A. Algra, and on behalf of the SMART study group Carotid intima-media thickness and the risk of new vascular events in patients with manifest atherosclerotic disease: the SMART study Eur. Heart J., August 2, 2006; 27(16): 1971 - 1978. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. J Roman, T. Z Naqvi, J. M Gardin, M. Gerhard-Herman, M. Jaff, and E. Mohler American Society of Echocardiography Report: Clinical application of noninvasive vascular ultrasound in cardiovascular risk stratification: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society for Vascular Medicine and Biology Vascular Medicine, August 1, 2006; 11(3): 201 - 211. [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. R. Crouse III Thematic review series: Patient-Oriented Research. Imaging atherosclerosis: state of the art J. Lipid Res., August 1, 2006; 47(8): 1677 - 1699. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Sari, T. Okan, S. Akar, H. Cece, C. Altay, M. Secil, M. Birlik, F. Onen, and N. Akkoc Impaired endothelial function in patients with ankylosing spondylitis Rheumatology, March 1, 2006; 45(3): 283 - 286. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. J. Roman, E. Moeller, A. Davis, S. A. Paget, M. K. Crow, M. D. Lockshin, L. Sammaritano, R. B. Devereux, J. E. Schwartz, D. M. Levine, et al. Preclinical carotid atherosclerosis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Intern Med, February 21, 2006; 144(4): 249 - 256. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Bernard, A. Serusclat, F. Targe, S. Charriere, O. Roth, J. Beaune, F. Berthezene, and P. Moulin Incremental Predictive Value of Carotid Ultrasonography in the Assessment of Coronary Risk in a Cohort of Asymptomatic Type 2 Diabetic Subjects Diabetes Care, May 1, 2005; 28(5): 1158 - 1162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Ogata, M. Yasaka, M. Yamagishi, O. Seguchi, K. Nagatsuka, and K. Minematsu Atherosclerosis Found on Carotid Ultrasonography Is Associated With Atherosclerosis on Coronary Intravascular Ultrasonography J. Ultrasound Med., April 1, 2005; 24(4): 469 - 474. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. E. Chambless, G. Heiss, E. Shahar, M. J. Earp, and J. Toole Prediction of Ischemic Stroke Risk in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study Am. J. Epidemiol., August 1, 2004; 160(3): 259 - 269. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. M. van der Meer, M. L. Bots, A. Hofman, A. Iglesias del Sol, D. A.M. van der Kuip, and J. C.M. Witteman Predictive Value of Noninvasive Measures of Atherosclerosis for Incident Myocardial Infarction: The Rotterdam Study Circulation, March 9, 2004; 109(9): 1089 - 1094. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. T. Bloomgarden Approaches to Cardiovascular Disease and Its Treatment Diabetes Care, December 1, 2003; 26(12): 3342 - 3348. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. L. Bots, G. W. Evans, W. A. Riley, and D. E. Grobbee Carotid Intima-Media Thickness Measurements in Intervention Studies: Design Options, Progression Rates, and Sample Size Considerations: A Point of View Stroke, December 1, 2003; 34(12): 2985 - 2994. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Hollander, A.E. Hak, P.J. Koudstaal, M.L. Bots, D.E. Grobbee, A. Hofman, J.C.M. Witteman, and M.M.B. Breteler Comparison Between Measures of Atherosclerosis and Risk of Stroke: The Rotterdam Study Stroke, October 1, 2003; 34(10): 2367 - 2372. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. M. Meinders, L. Kornet, and A. P. G. Hoeks Assessment of spatial inhomogeneities in intima media thickness along an arterial segment using its dynamic behavior Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, June 5, 2003; 285(1): H384 - H391. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. B. Mark, L. J. Shaw, M. S. Lauer, P. G. O'Malley, and P. Heidenreich Task force #5--is atherosclerosis imaging cost effective? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 4, 2003; 41(11): 1906 - 1917. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. E. Wagenknecht, D. Zaccaro, M. A. Espeland, A. J. Karter, D. H. O'Leary, and S. M. Haffner Diabetes and Progression of Carotid Atherosclerosis: The Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., June 1, 2003; 23(6): 1035 - 1041. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Jerrard-Dunne, H. S. Markus, D. A. Steckel, A. Buehler, S. von Kegler, and M. Sitzer Early Carotid Atherosclerosis and Family History of Vascular Disease: Specific Effects on Arterial Sites Have Implications for Genetic Studies Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., February 1, 2003; 23(2): 302 - 306. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Swan and M.A. Gatzoulis Early atherosclerosis ...what does it mean? Eur. Heart J., September 1, 2002; 23(17): 1317 - 1319. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W.A. Riley Carotid intima-media thickness: risk assessment and scanning protocol Eur. Heart J., June 2, 2002; 23(12): 916 - 918. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. F. Redberg, P. Greenland, V. Fuster, K. Pyorala, S. N. Blair, A. R. Folsom, A. B. Newman, D. H. O'Leary, T. J. Orchard, B. Psaty, et al. Prevention Conference VI: Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease: Writing Group III: Risk Assessment in Persons With Diabetes Circulation, May 7, 2002; 105 (18): e144 - e152. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. D. Barth, A. Iglesias del Sol, D. E. Grobbee, J. C.M. Witteman, and M. L. Bots IMT for the Elderly? Stroke, October 1, 2001; 32(10): 2443 - 2445. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||