Vascular Events and Carotid Atherosclerosis: A 5-Year Prospective Cohort Study in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and a Contemporary Cardiovascular Prevention Treatment

Vouillarmet, Julien; Marsot, Charlotte; Maucort-Boulch, Delphine; Riche, Benjamin; Helfre, Marjorie; Grange, Claire

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9059761

Journal of Diabetes Research

On this page

Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Conclusions Abbreviations Data Availability Conflicts of Interest Authors’ Contributions Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2019 | Article ID 9059761 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9059761

Vascular Events and Carotid Atherosclerosis: A 5-Year Prospective Cohort Study in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and a Contemporary Cardiovascular Prevention Treatment

Julien Vouillarmet,¹Charlotte Marsot,¹Delphine Maucort-Boulch,^2,3,4Benjamin Riche,^2,3,4Marjorie Helfre,⁵and Claire Grange⁵

Academic Editor: Michaelangela Barbieri

Received03 Jul 2019

Accepted04 Dec 2019

Published23 Dec 2019

Abstract

Background and Aims. European recommendations on cardiovascular prevention suggest that carotid atherosclerosis assessment by duplex ultrasonography could help in some cases to better assess CV risk. We investigated whether the presence of carotid atherosclerosis determined by duplex ultrasonography is associated with cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes and could therefore help to reclassify cardiovascular risk. Methods. Among 624 consecutive patients with type 2 diabetes and carotid atherosclerosis assessment by duplex ultrasonography between January and December 2012, 583 (93%) were included and followed up prospectively. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of cardiovascular events. The rate of new cardiovascular events was compared between patients with () and those without () prior cardiovascular events. Results. A total of new 104 cardiovascular events occurred in 72 patients (12.5%) during a follow-up period of years. At baseline, for 202 patients (34.6%), carotid evaluation was normal; 381 (65.4%) had a carotid atherosclerosis lesion. The presence of carotid atherosclerosis at baseline was not significantly associated with an increased risk of new cardiovascular events in both groups. The rate of new cardiovascular events was more than twice as high in patients with prior cardiovascular event than those without. Conclusion. Systematic carotid atherosclerosis assessment by duplex ultrasonography in patients with type 2 diabetes and a contemporary cardiovascular prevention treatment does not offer additional information as to the risk of cardiovascular events. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT02929355).

1. Introduction

Although there has been notable improvement in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes and the decrease of cardiovascular (CV) events over recent years [1], patients with diabetes are still considered at a high risk of vascular events by the latest international guidelines on CV prevention [2, 3]. In European guidelines, nearly all patients with type 2 diabetes must be considered at a high CV risk with an LDL-C target below 100 mg/dL. Moreover, a subgroup at a very high risk has been identified, and for these, the LDL-C goal is below 70 mg/dL. This subgroup of patients includes those with prior CV events but also those without prior CV events with an additional important CV risk factor [4]. Similarly, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) [3] recommends at least a systematic moderate dose of statins according to age and risk factors that in practice makes nearly all patients with diabetes eligible, and a high dose of statin for those at a higher risk, i.e., when 2 additional CV risk factors are present and/or prior CV events. Despite these recommendations, individualisation of the vascular risk remains difficult and CV risk scores, based on traditional CV risk factors, do not predict well the presence of high CV risk and are not applicable to populations outside the development sample [5, 6]. Other tools exist to evaluate CV risk, such as the coronary artery calcium (CAC) score that is based on radiological imaging; it has a very high negative predictive value and seems interesting to avoid unnecessary treatment by statins, but its generalisation raises concerns about radiation exposure [7–9]. Another approach is to evaluate carotid atherosclerosis; for this, intima-media thickness of the carotid artery has been employed but is no longer recommended owing to its high variability and low intraindividual reproducibility [2]. Carotid plaque assessment by duplex ultrasonography (DUS), however, seems interesting as the presence of these is a strong predictor for future ischemic stroke but has also been associated with an increased risk of CV disease [10–19] and seems to better assess CV risk than the CV risk scores [20–23]. DUS is adapted to the evaluation of carotid plaques owing to the reproducibility of the measure and the safety of the procedure [24]. This has led to the suggestion in the most recent European recommendations that carotid atherosclerosis assessment by DUS could help in some cases to better assess CV risk [2]. Indeed, based on these published data [7–23], one can speculate that patients without prior CV events but with carotid atherosclerosis should be classified as at a very high risk as those with prior CV events. However, all but one [17] study with clinical follow-up [10–16, 18, 19] concerned cohorts without a contemporary CV preventive treatment—notably with a low use of statins, and a low prevalence of diabetes. The only study to have included patients who were well covered by statins and antiplatelet agents found that the presence of carotid atherosclerosis was an independent predictive factor of CV events, yet no subgroup analysis was performed to investigate whether this association was also found for those with diabetes who represented nearly half of the total study population [17]. In this context, there is currently insufficient proof to determine whether a systematic screening of carotid atherosclerosis by DUS in asymptomatic patients with diabetes and a contemporary preventive CV treatment is effective. Therefore, in the present study, we prospectively assessed whether there was an association between the presence of carotid atherosclerosis detected by DUS and new vascular events in patients with diabetes.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Patients

All consecutive patients with type 2 diabetes who underwent DUS investigation of their extracranial carotid arteries from 1 January 2012 until 31 December 2012 in the Lyon teaching hospitals (Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France) were prospectively enrolled. Patients were referred to the endocrinology department for a systematic assessment of diabetes including identification of chronic complications. Patients with diabetes who were initially neurologically asymptomatic with respect to carotid artery disease were included.

At baseline, all patients had a complete workup (in the endocrinology department) concerning personal and familial history of vascular events, type of diabetes, duration of diabetes, glycaemic control, microangiopathy, and any medication including antihypertensive drugs, antidiabetic drugs, lipid-lowering drugs, and antiplatelet agents. Other CV risk factors were noted: fasting lipid profile, resting blood pressure, and smoking habit. Current smoking was defined as active smoking during the past 3 years. High blood pressure was defined as ≥140/85 mmHg [25]. Nephropathy was defined by the presence of at least one of the following signs: estimated glomerular filtration rate below 60 mL/min/1.73m², positive microalbuminuria, or positive proteinuria.

Very high risk CV patients with a LDL-C target below 70 mg/dL according to European guidelines include those with prior CV events and those with an additional important CV risk factor (smoking, proteinuria, renal insufficiency, uncontrolled blood pressure above 180/110 mmHg, marked hypercholesterolaemia above 8 mmol/L (309 mg/dL)). Others were considered at high risk with a LDL-C target below 100 mg/dL [2].

According to ADA, patients with diabetes with an estimated high risk of CV event above 10% at 10 years include men or women aged ≥50 years who have at least one additional major risk factor (family history of premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, hypertension, smoking, dyslipidaemia, or albuminuria) [3].

2.2. Carotid Atherosclerosis Assessment

All included patients underwent assessment of carotid atherosclerosis by DUS. Both carotid arteries were examined using a B mode ultrasound (Siemens Acuson Antares, United Medical Instrument, San Jose, CA, USA) equipped with a 7-10 MHz high-resolution probe and operated by a trained technician. Peak systolic velocities were measured in the common carotid artery (CCA), carotid bulb, and internal carotid artery (ICA). A diagnosis of stenosis was made when velocity criteria consistent with the existence of plaques and the narrowing of the lumen were observed. The velocity cut-off described below permits to estimate the degree of stenosis with a good correlation to North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy (NASCET) criteria [26]. The most severe lesion for each patient was selected, and the thickness of these were classified as recommended as normal, plaque of the diameter without acceleration (ICA/CCA peak systolic velocity ), and with acceleration (ICA/CCA peak systolic velocity ) [27] (Figure 1).

New CV events were prospectively assessed: CV-related death, acute myocardial infarction, stroke or transient ischemic attack, coronary revascularisation, carotid revascularisation, or lower limb revascularisation. Major adverse cardiac event (MACE) was defined as either CV-related death, acute myocardial infarction, or stroke. Patients were followed-up in routine care without systematic CV exams according to guidelines, but all new CV events were documented on medical report.

2.3. Regulatory Aspects

The investigations were carried out in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was registered with the institutional office of the national data protection agency (Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés; ID: 15-021) and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT02929355). All patients were provided with written information. In accordance with legislation in place at the time of the study in France, ethics approval was not required, and oral informed consent was collected from all participants.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The primary outcome was the first occurrence of any of the following new CV events: CV-related death, acute myocardial infarction, stroke or transient ischemic attack, coronary revascularisation, carotid revascularisation, or lower limb revascularisation. Variables were described using the mean and standard deviation (SD) for continuous variables, counts and percentages for categorical ones. Univariate proportional hazards Cox models were first fitted with regard to CV events for the following variables: age, current smoking, antiplatelet treatment, blood mmHg, nephropathy, and the presence of carotid atherosclerosis at baseline for the 479 patients without prior CV events. Analyses were repeated for the 104 patients with prior CV events. Then, multivariate models were built including significant and/or clinically relevant variables. For each model, the proportional assumption was checked, and hazard ratios with corresponding 95% confidence interval were estimated. Nonlinearity effects of covariates (especially age) were assessed. A log-rank test was used to compare survival curves between all strata. Statistical significance was defined as a value of . Statistical analysis was performed using the SAS software, version 9.1.3 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Characteristics of the Population

A total of 625 patients were included; 583 had clinical follow-up data available, and 42 patients were lost to clinical follow-up (Figure 2). Among those with clinical follow-up, there were 68 deaths. The duration of which was years, and the median (range) was 5.7 (0.2-7.6) years; there was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between patients with or without follow-up.

Baseline characteristics of the population are described in Table 1. A total of 104/583 patients (18%) had a prior CV event, and among those without a prior CV event, 313/479 patients (65%) had an estimated risk of CV event at 10 years greater than 10% according to the ADA [3] and 160/479 (33%) were considered at a very high CV risk according to European guidelines and therefore a LDL-C target below 70 md/dL [2]. Patients with prior CV events were significantly older than patients without prior CV events, had a longer duration of diabetes, had a more frequent use of insulin, and had more frequent microvascular complications. They were significantly more frequently covered by lipid- and blood pressure-lowering therapy; they most frequently had an antiplatelet agent, and LDL-C was significantly lower.

Indication of DUS at baseline was a systematic screening for 385 patients (66%) and a follow-up of known carotid atherosclerosis lesion for 198 patients (34%). At baseline, 202 patients (34.6%) presented a normal carotid DUS, 369 had a (63.2%), and 12 had a (2.0%); 1 patient had a .

3.2. New Cardiovascular Events

During follow-up, 104 CV events occurred in 72 patients (12.5% of the 583 patients with follow-up; 3.5%/patient/year); 70 CV events in those without prior CV events (2.8%/patient/year) and 34 in those with prior CV events (6.2%/patient/year). Among these events, 33 MACE occurred in 32 patients (1.0%/patient/year); 24 MACE occurred in those 23 patients without prior CV event (0.9%/patient/year) and 9 in those with prior CV events (1.7%/patient/year). There were also 68 revascularisations (coronary, ; lower limb, ; or carotid, ). Over half of coronary revascularisations were performed after cardiac symptoms (chest pain at rest or exercise, angina, acute pulmonary oedema, or dyspnea; 29/49, 59%). A minority was performed after myocardial infarction (7/49, 14%) and a quarter after silent myocardial ischemia screening (13/49, 27%). Half of the lower limb revascularizations were performed after diabetic foot syndrome (12/21, 57%), while the others were performed because of intermittent claudication (8/21, 38%) or after systematic screening (1/21, 5%). Only one carotid revascularisation was performed during the follow-up after a transient ischemic attack. Only 2 patients with prior CV events presented a ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) during follow-up and none of them a non-STEMI (NSTEMI). Distribution of vascular events in patients with or without prior CV events is reported in Figure 3. There was no significant difference in the distribution of new CV events between the two groups. The interval between baseline carotid DUS and the first CV event was years.

Rate of new CV events in patients with or without prior CV events according to the presence or absence of carotid atherosclerosis is reported in Figure 4. Among those patients with prior CV events, 34 CV events occurred in 21/104 patients, including 29 CV events in 17/84 patients with carotid atherosclerosis and 5 CV events in 4/20 patients without carotid atherosclerosis. Concerning these 21 patients, 15 had nephropathy (71%), 4 smoked (19%), 19 had a lipid-lowering therapy (90%), 20 had a blood pressure-lowering therapy (95%), and 17 had an antiplatelet therapy (81%). LDL-C mg/dL was achieved in 6 patients (33%), and blood pressure was uncontrolled in 4 patients (13%); these 4 patients had blood pressure-lowering therapy.

Among those patients without prior CV events, 70 CV events occurred in 51/479 patients, including 48 CV events in 36/299 patients with carotid atherosclerosis and 22 CV events in 15/180 patients without carotid atherosclerosis. Concerning these 51 patients, 27 had nephropathy (53%) and 10 smoked (20%). Nearly half of patients had antiplatelet therapy (; 49%), 41 had a lipid-lowering therapy (80%), and 44 had a blood pressure-lowering therapy (86%). A total of 19 patients were at a very high CV risk according to European guidelines [3] with a LDL-C mg/dL (no patient was at this target), and 14 were at a high CV risk with a LDL-C mg/dL (4 patients were at this target, 29%).

In both univariate and multivariate analysis, only age was significantly associated with new CV events in both groups, i.e., patients with prior CV events and those without prior CV events (Tables 2 and 3).

4. Discussion

The present study found that there was a low rate of carotid atherosclerosis progression and no association between the presence of carotid atherosclerosis and CV events in patients with type 2 diabetes and a contemporary preventive CV treatment. Moreover, the rate of new CV events was threefold lower in patients without prior CV events, even when associated with carotid atherosclerosis, compared to those with prior CV events with or without carotid atherosclerosis.

As observed elsewhere among patients with diabetes [28, 29], a high prevalence of carotid atherosclerosis was found, but only a few patients had a severe . Contrary to other studies [10–19, 30], no association between the presence of carotid atherosclerosis and CV events was found herein among patients with diabetes and mostly at a high CV risk. To explain this discrepancy, it is important to note that most of the previous studies concerned patients with a low to intermediate CV risk with a low use of statin and only a small proportion of included patients had diabetes (from 0 to 21%) [10–16, 18, 19]. Furthermore, even when CV preventive treatment is described in these reports, there is no information on the number of patients who reach the target for LDL-C and blood pressure. For patients at a high CV risk with carotid atherosclerosis assessment (), the REACH study found a 22% increased risk of CV events associated with the presence of carotid lesion that after a priori stratification was found only among those with prior CV events [17]. The potential association with diabetes (41% of the population) with the presence of carotid atherosclerosis was not investigated. Finally, two small studies that included only patients with diabetes and a low to intermediate risk of CV events found that carotid plaque was less accurate than the CAC score to predict coronary disease assessed by coronary computed tomography angiography [31] and CV events [32]. Taken together, the exclusive inclusion of patients with diabetes and a high estimated CV risk receiving contemporary preventive treatments herein could explain the absence of association between carotid atherosclerosis and CV events observed in other studies.

Although a comparison between studies is difficult due to heterogeneity in the definition of CV events, the findings herein concerning the rate of CV events seem in line with that reported in the literature. Focusing on the rate of MACE (CV-related death, stroke, and myocardial infarction) in patients with type 2 diabetes without prior CV events, incidence of events in the present study was low (1%/patient/year) and close to that reported in the DIAD study (0.6%/patient/year) [33]. The rate of MACE herein is higher for patients with prior CV events (1.7%/patient/year), but lower than observed in literature (from 3.5% to 7.9%/year) [34]. Another point to consider is that patients with prior CV events have often more advanced disease than those without, as reported herein, which partly explains the higher risk of CV events in this population. Conversely, they had also a more aggressive CV preventive treatment and a lower LDL-C.

The present study does, however, has several limitations. The size of the cohort is relatively small which could affect interpretation; however, the rate of CV events for patients without prior CV event but carotid atherosclerosis was much lower than those with prior CV events and does not justify a substantial modification in terms of preventive CV treatment. The second point is that, although the majority of the patients included herein were at a high CV risk with widespread use of CV preventive treatment, as many patients were not on target as required by recent guidelines [2]. It is, however, important to note that this is an observational study without recommendation to adjust CV treatment. Studies that observe real-life practice found similar results; 43 to 58% of patients at a high CV risk and 72 to 78% of patients at a very high risk were still above LDL-C target despite the use of statins [35–37]. In the same way, it was observed that a quarter of patients with an indication for treatment were not receiving statins and that the intensity of statin was not sufficient in nearly half of cases [38] underlining the need to be more aggressive in terms of CV risk factor control. However, as not all patients had optimal CV treatment, the rate of CV events could be further reduced in the population studied herein. Another aspect to consider is that the cohort included a low rate of significant carotid stenosis as observed elsewhere [28, 29, 39, 40], and we cannot exclude a link between CV risk of carotid atherosclerosis for patients with or >70%.

5. Conclusions

To conclude, there was no significant association between the presence of carotid atherosclerosis and the occurrence of new CV events in patients with type 2 diabetes. Therefore, screening using carotid DUS may not be very informative for the assessment of CV risk in patients with type 2 diabetes who are at high CV risk based on usual risk factors.

Abbreviations

CAS:	Coronary calcium score
CCA:	Common carotid artery
CV:	Cardiovascular
DUS:	Duplex ultrasonography
ICA:	Internal carotid artery
IMT:	Intima-media thickness
MACE:	Major adverse cardiac events
NASCET:	North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there is no duality of interest associated with this manuscript.

Authors’ Contributions

CM and JV conceptualised and designed the study, contributed to data analysis and interpretation, and wrote the manuscript. CG and MH contributed to acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of the data. BR and DMB contributed to analysis and interpretation of the data. All authors were involved in revising the manuscript critically for important intellectual content and for final approval of the version to be published. JV is the guarantor of this work and, as such, had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Acknowledgments

We thank P. Robinson (DRCI-Hospices Civils de Lyon) for the help in manuscript preparation.

References

E. W. Gregg, Y. Li, J. Wang et al., “Changes in diabetes-related complications in the United States, 1990–2010,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 370, no. 16, pp. 1514–1523, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. F. Piepoli, A. W. Hoes, S. Agewall et al., “2016 European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: the sixth joint task force of the European Society of Cardiology and other societies on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited experts) developed with the special contribution of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR),” Atherosclerosis, vol. 252, pp. 207–274, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
American Diabetes Association, “8. Cardiovascular disease and risk management,” Diabetes Care, vol. 39, Supplement 1, pp. S60–S71, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
The Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, “Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies,” The Lancet, vol. 375, no. 9733, pp. 2215–2222, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. L. Coleman, R. J. Stevens, R. Retnakaran, and R. R. Holman, “Framingham, SCORE, and DECODE risk equations do not provide reliable cardiovascular risk estimates in type 2 diabetes,” Diabetes Care, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 1292-1293, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. A. W. A. van der Heijden, M. M. Ortegon, L. W. Niessen, G. Nijpels, and J. M. Dekker, “Prediction of coronary heart disease risk in a general, pre-diabetic, and diabetic population during 10 years of follow-up: accuracy of the Framingham, SCORE, and UKPDS risk functions: the Hoorn study,” Diabetes Care, vol. 32, no. 11, pp. 2094–2098, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. S. Polonsky, R. L. McClelland, N. W. Jorgensen et al., “Coronary artery calcium score and risk classification for coronary heart disease prediction,” JAMA, vol. 303, no. 16, pp. 1610–1616, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Nasir, M. S. Bittencourt, M. J. Blaha et al., “Implications of coronary artery calcium testing among statin candidates according to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol management guidelines: MESA (multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis),” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 66, no. 15, pp. 1657–1668, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. M. Grundy, N. J. Stone, and for the Guideline Writing Committee for the 2018 Cholesterol Guidelines, “2018 cholesterol clinical practice guidelines: synopsis of the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/multisociety cholesterol guideline,” Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 170, no. 11, pp. 779–783, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Belcaro, A. N. Nicolaides, G. Ramaswami et al., “Carotid and femoral ultrasound morphology screening and cardiovascular events in low risk subjects: a 10-year follow-up study (the CAFES-CAVE study¹),” Atherosclerosis, vol. 156, no. 2, pp. 379–387, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Davidsson, B. Fagerberg, G. Bergström, and C. Schmidt, “Ultrasound-assessed plaque occurrence in the carotid and femoral arteries are independent predictors of cardiovascular events in middle-aged men during 10 years of follow-up,” Atherosclerosis, vol. 209, no. 2, pp. 469–473, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Novo, P. Carità, E. Corrado et al., “Preclinical carotid atherosclerosis enhances the global cardiovascular risk and increases the rate of cerebro- and cardiovascular events in a five-year follow-up,” Atherosclerosis, vol. 211, no. 1, pp. 287–290, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Cournot, A. Bura, J.-P. Cambou et al., “Arterial ultrasound screening as a tool for coronary risk assessment in asymptomatic men and women,” Angiology, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 282–288, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Hollander, M. L. Bots, A. I. del Sol et al., “Carotid plaques increase the risk of stroke and subtypes of cerebral infarction in asymptomatic elderly: the Rotterdam study,” Circulation, vol. 105, no. 24, pp. 2872–2877, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. D. Gepner, R. Young, J. A. Delaney et al., “Comparison of coronary artery calcium presence, carotid plaque presence, and carotid intima-media thickness for cardiovascular disease prediction in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis,” Circulation. Cardiovascular Imaging, vol. 8, no. 1, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Nambi, L. Chambless, A. R. Folsom et al., “Carotid intima-media thickness and presence or absence of plaque improves prediction of coronary heart disease risk: the ARIC (atherosclerosis risk in communities) study,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 55, no. 15, pp. 1600–1607, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Sirimarco, P. Amarenco, J. Labreuche et al., “Carotid atherosclerosis and risk of subsequent coronary event in outpatients with atherothrombosis,” Stroke, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 373–379, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
U. Baber, R. Mehran, S. Sartori et al., “Prevalence, impact, and predictive value of detecting subclinical coronary and carotid atherosclerosis in asymptomatic adults: the bioimage study,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 65, no. 11, pp. 1065–1074, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Rundek, H. Arif, B. Boden-Albala, M. S. Elkind, M. C. Paik, and R. L. Sacco, “Carotid plaque, a subclinical precursor of vascular events: the Northern Manhattan Study,” Neurology, vol. 70, no. 14, pp. 1200–1207, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. E. Postley, Y. Luo, N. D. Wong, and J. M. Gardin, “Identification by ultrasound evaluation of the carotid and femoral arteries of high-risk subjects missed by three validated cardiovascular disease risk algorithms,” The American Journal of Cardiology, vol. 116, no. 10, pp. 1617–1623, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Ray, M. V. Huisman, and T. J. Rabelink, “Can and should carotid ultrasound be used in cardiovascular risk assessment?: the internist’s perspective,” European Journal of Internal Medicine, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 112–117, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. C. H. van den Oord, G. L. ten Kate, E. J. G. Sijbrands, A. F. W. van der Steen, and A. F. L. Schinkel, “Effect of carotid plaque screening using contrast-enhanced ultrasound on cardiovascular risk stratification,” The American Journal of Cardiology, vol. 111, no. 5, pp. 754–759, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Helfre, C. Grange, B. Riche, D. Maucort-Boulch, C. Thivolet, and J. Vouillarmet, “Usefulness of a systematic screening of carotid atherosclerosis in asymptomatic people with type 2 diabetes for cardiovascular risk reclassification,” Annales d'Endocrinologie, vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 14–19, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. L. Abbott, “Are we ready for routine ‘subclinical’ atherosclerosis screening? Not yet,” European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 313–316, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Authors/Task Force Members, L. Rydén, P. J. Grant et al., “ESC Guidelines on diabetes, pre-diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases developed in collaboration with the EASD: the task force on diabetes, pre-diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and developed in collaboration with the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD),” European Heart Journal, vol. 34, no. 39, pp. 3035–3087, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G.-M. von Reutern, M.-W. Goertler, N. M. Bornstein et al., “Grading carotid stenosis using ultrasonic methods,” Stroke, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 916–921, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Gerhard-Herman, J. M. Gardin, M. Jaff et al., “Guidelines for noninvasive vascular laboratory testing: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society of Vascular Medicine and Biology,” Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 955–972, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Lacroix, V. Aboyans, M. H. Criqui et al., “Type-2 diabetes and carotid stenosis: a proposal for a screening strategy in asymptomatic patients,” Vascular Medicine, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 93–99, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. H. Park, W. H. Kim, J. H. Kim, T. S. Park, and H. S. Baek, “Prevalence of and risk factors for extracranial internal carotid artery stenosis in Korean type 2 diabetic patients,” Diabetic Medicine, vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 1377–1380, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Z. Naqvi and M.-S. Lee, “Carotid intima-media thickness and plaque in cardiovascular risk assessment,” JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 1025–1038, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. H. R. E. Rassi, T. W. Churchill, C. A. F. Tavares et al., “Use of imaging and clinical data to screen for cardiovascular disease in asymptomatic diabetics,” Cardiovascular Diabetology, vol. 15, p. 28, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K.-K. Lau, Y.-K. Wong, Y.-H. Chan et al., “Prognostic implications of surrogate markers of atherosclerosis in low to intermediate risk patients with type 2 diabetes,” Cardiovascular Diabetology, vol. 11, p. 101, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. H. Young, F. J. T. Wackers, D. A. Chyun et al., “Cardiac outcomes after screening for asymptomatic coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes: the DIAD study: a randomized controlled trial,” JAMA, vol. 301, no. 15, pp. 1547–1555, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Avogaro, G. P. Fadini, G. Sesti, E. Bonora, and S. Del Prato, “Continued efforts to translate diabetes cardiovascular outcome trials into clinical practice,” Cardiovascular Diabetology, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 111, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Laforest, P. Moulin, T. Souchet et al., “Correlates of LDL-cholesterol goal attainment in patients under lipid lowering therapy,” Atherosclerosis, vol. 199, no. 2, pp. 368–377, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. K. Gitt, D. Lautsch, J. Ferrieres et al., “Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in a global cohort of 57,885 statin-treated patients,” Atherosclerosis, vol. 255, pp. 200–209, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. K. Ali, K. M. Bullard, J. B. Saaddine, C. C. Cowie, G. Imperatore, and E. W. Gregg, “Achievement of goals in U.S. diabetes care, 1999–2010,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 368, no. 17, pp. 1613–1624, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Navar, T. Y. Wang, S. Li et al., “Lipid management in contemporary community practice: results from the provider assessment of lipid management (PALM) registry,” American Heart Journal, vol. 193, pp. 84–92, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. de Weerd, J. P. Greving, B. Hedblad et al., “Prevalence of asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis in the general population: an individual participant data meta-analysis,” Stroke, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1294–1297, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Högberg, B. Kragsterman, M. Björck, J. Tjärnström, and A. Wanhainen, “Carotid artery atherosclerosis among 65-year-old Swedish men – a population-based screening study,” European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 5–10, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2019 Julien Vouillarmet et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

759

Downloads

969

Citations