Sex Differences in Coronary Artery Calcium and Mortality From Coronary Heart Disease, Cardiovascular Disease, and All Causes in Adults With Diabetes: The Coronary Calcium Consortium
RESULTS Among 4,503 adults with diabetes (32.5% women) aged 21–93 years, 61.2% of women and 80.4% of men had CAC >0. Total, CVD, and CHD mortality rates were directly related to CAC; women had higher total and CVD death rates than men when CAC >100. Age- and risk factor–adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) per log unit CAC were higher among women versus men for total mortality (1.28 vs. 1.18) (interaction P = 0.01) and CVD mortality (1.47 vs. 1.27) (interaction P = 0.04) but were similar for CHD mortality (1.48 and 1.48). For CVD mortality, HRs with CAC scores of 101–400 and >400 were 3.67 and 6.27, respectively, for women and 1.63 and 3.48, respectively, for men (interaction P = 0.04). For total mortality, HRs were 2.56 and 4.05 for women, respectively, and 1.88 and 2.66 for men, respectively (interaction P = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS CAC predicts CHD, CVD, and all-cause mortality in patients with diabetes; however, greater CAC predicts CVD and total mortality more strongly in women.Sex Differences in Coronary Artery Calcium and Mortality From Coronary Heart Disease, Cardiovascular Disease, and All Causes in Adults With Diabetes: The Coronary Calcium Consortium — Diabetes Care 2020 Oct; 43(10): 2597-2606. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-0166
For far too long, many patients have undergone a cardiac test that carries grave risks with the misunderstanding that they are getting the definitive assessment of their coronary arteries. Chances are if you have visited an emergency room in the USA with chest pain and you weren’t clearly having an acute heart attack, you ended up…
Thank you Dr. Pearson.
Thank you Dr. Pearson.
The skeptical cardiologist has been utilizing coronary artery calcium (CAC) scans to help decide which patients are at high risk for heart attacks, and sudden cardiac death for the last decade. As I first described in 2014, (see here) those with higher than expected calcium scores warrant more aggressive treatment and those with lower scores less aggrressive treatment.
Although , as I have discussed previously, CAC is not the “mammography of the heart” it is incredibly helpful in sorting out personalized cardiovascular risk. We use standard risk factors like lipids, smoking, age, gender and diabetes to stratify individuals according to their 10 year risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) but many apparent low risk individuals (often due to inherited familial risk) drop dead from ASCVD and many apparent high risk individuals don’t need statin therapy.
Previously, major guidelines from organizations like the AHA and the ACC did not recommend…
View original post 881 more words
In the Jackson Heart Study (JHS), we examined the association of diabetes with abdominal aortic calcification (AAC) among African Americans. Among included individuals (n = 1,664), the mean age was 57 (± 11) years, 69% were female, and 18.3% had diabetes (based on fasting blood glucose [FBG], HbA1c, use of glucose-lowering medications, or physician diagnosis). The median AAC and coronary artery calcification (CAC) scores were 904.15 (interquartile range 0–1093.10) and 0 (0–96.19), respectively. The prevalence of any AAC or CAC was 69% and 49%, respectively. Individuals with diabetes were older, had higher BMI, had higher systolic blood pressure and prevalence of hypertension, had lower HDL levels, were less affluent or physically active, had poorer nutritional intake, and had higher levels of hs-CRP.
Source: Diabetes Care