Disparities Between Ideal Cardiovascular Health Metrics and Subclinical Atherosclerotic Burden

Predicting Subclinical Atherosclerosis in Low-Risk Individuals: Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score and Fuster-BEWAT Score

BACKGROUND

The ideal cardiovascular health score (ICHS) is recommended for use in primary prevention. Simpler tools not requiring laboratory tests, such as the Fuster-BEWAT (blood pressure [B], exercise [E], weight [W], alimentation [A], and tobacco [T]) score (FBS), are also available.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of ICHS and FBS in predicting the presence and extent of subclinical atherosclerosis.

METHODS

A total of 3,983 participants 40 to 54 years of age were enrolled in the PESA (Progression of Early Subclinical Atherosclerosis) cohort. Subclinical atherosclerosis was measured in right and left carotids, abdominal aorta, right and left iliofemoral arteries, and coronary arteries. Subjects were classified as having poor, intermediate, or ideal cardiovascular health based on the number of favorable ICHS or FBS.

RESULTS

With poor ICHS and FBS as references, individuals with ideal ICHS and FBS showed lower adjusted odds of having atherosclerotic plaques (ICHS odds ratio [OR]: 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31 to 0.55 vs.

FBS OR

0.49; 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.66), coronary artery calcium (CACS) ≥1 (CACS OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.60 vs.

CACS OR

0.53; 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.74), higher number of affected territories (OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.41 vs. OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.50), and higher CACS level (OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.58 vs. OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.72). Similar levels of significantly discriminating accuracy were found for ICHS and FBS with respect to the presence of plaques (C-statistic: 0.694; 95% CI: 0.678 to 0.711 vs. 0.692; 95% CI: 0.676 to 0.709, respectively) and for CACS ≥1 (C-statistic: 0.782; 95% CI: 0.765 to 0.800 vs. 0.780; 95% CI: 0.762 to 0.798, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Both scores predict the presence and extent of subclinical atherosclerosis with similar accuracy, highlighting the value of the FBS as a simpler and more affordable score for evaluating the risk of subclinical disease.

Association between a healthy cardiovascular risk factor profile and coronary artery calcium score: Results from the Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Adult Health (ELSA-Brasil)

BACKGROUND

Our goal was to evaluate cross-sectionally the association between ideal risk factor (IRF) profile and the presence and severity of subclinical atherosclerosis measured as coronary artery calcium (CAC) in the Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Adult Health.

METHODS

We included 4,077 participants with no prior history of cardiovascular disease aged 35 to 74 years who underwent CAC measurement. The 2010 Task Force of the American Heart Association cutoffs were used to define the ideal level of smoking, physical activity, diet, blood pressure, glucose/cholesterol levels, and body mass index.

RESULTS

Participants were categorized according the number of IRF: 0 to 1 (n = 1,025, 25.1%), 2 (n = 1,200, 29.4%), 3 to 4 (n = 1,551, 38.1%), or 5 to 7 (n = 301, 7.4%). Compared to individuals with 0 to 1 IRF, the odds ratio of participants with 2 IRFs presenting with CAC >0 (compared to 0), ≥100 (compared to <100), and ≥400 (compared to <400) was 0.75 (95% CI 0.62-0.91), 0.64 (0.49-0.84), and 0.75 (0.49-1.15), respectively. Similarly, the odds ratios of CACs >0, ≥100, and ≥400 in individuals with 3 to 4 IRFs were 0.59 (95% CI 0.48-0.71), 0.46 (0.34-0.62), and 0.50 (0.30-0.83), respectively, and, for individuals with 5 to 7 IRFs, were 0.36 (95% CI 0.24-0.56), 0.22 (0.09-0.55), and 0.20 (0.03-1.45), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Subjects with an IRF profile have lower CAC when compared to subjects with fewer controlled risk factors. However, even among individuals with 5 to 7 IRFs, it is possible to find a CAC higher than zero reflecting that measures of IRF do not fully account for all factors that resulted in coronary artery disease.

Management of Coronary Artery Calcium and Coronary CTA Findings

Coronary artery calcium (CAC) testing and coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) have significant data supporting their ability to identify coronary artery disease (CAD) and classify patient risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Evidence regarding CAC use for screening has established an excellent prognosis in patients with no detectable CAC, and the ability to risk re-classify the majority of asymptomatic patients considered intermediate risk by traditional risk scores. While data regarding the ideal management of CAC findings are limited, evidence supports statin consideration in patients with CAC > 0 and individualized aspirin therapy accounting for CAD risk factors, CAC severity, and factors which increase a patient's risk of bleeding. In patients with stable or acute symptoms undergoing coronary CTA, a normal CTA predicts excellent prognosis, allowing reassurance and disposition without further testing. When CTA identifies nonobstructive CAD (<50 % stenosis), observational data support consideration of statin use/intensification in patients with extensive plaque (at least four coronary segments involved) and patients with high-risk plaque features. In patients with both nonobstructive and obstructive CAD, multiple studies have now demonstrated an ability of CTA to guide management and improve CAD risk factor control. Still, significant under-treatment of cardiovascular risk factors and high-risk image findings remain, among concerns that CTA may increase invasive angiography and revascularization. To fully realize the impact of atherosclerosis imaging for ASCVD prevention, patient engagement in lifestyle changes and the modification of ASCVD risk factors remain the foundation of care. This review provides an overview of available data and recommendations in the management of CAC and CTA findings.