Measurement of CIMT in trialsLiterature -
Algorithms to measure carotid intima–media thickness in trials: a comparison of reproducibility, rate of progression and treatment effect
Soner Dogan, Yvonne Plantinga, John R. Crouse III, Gregory W. Evans, Joel S. Raichlen, Daniel H. O’Leary, Mike K. Palmer, Diederick E. Grobbee, Michiel L. Bots, on behalf of the METEOR Study Group
Journal of Hypertension 2011,29 [Epub ahead of print]
Current ultrasound protocols to measure carotid intima–media thickness (CIMT) in trials differ considerably. The best CIMT protocol would be one that combines high reproducibility, a large and precise estimate of the rate of CIMT progression and a large and precise estimate of the treatment effect. We performed a post-hoc analysis to determine the best algorithm for determining CIMT using data from the METEOR study, a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the effect of rosuvastatin on CIMT progression in 984 low coronary heart disease risk individuals with increased CIMT.
CIMT information was collected from two walls (near and far wall), three segments (common carotid, bifurcation and internal carotid artery), five different angles (for the right carotid artery – 60, 90, 120, 150, and 180 degrees on the Meijer’s carotid arc; for the left – 300, 270, 240, 210, and 180 degrees) of two sides (left and right carotid artery), resulting in possibly (2T3T5T2U) 60 measurements. On the basis of combinations of these measurements, we built 66 different ultrasound protocols to estimate a CIMT for each individual (22 protocols for mean common CIMT, 44 protocols for mean maximum CIMT). For each protocol we assessed reproducibility [intraclass correlation (ICC), mean difference of duplicate scans], 2- year progression rate in the placebo group with its corresponding standard error and treatment effect (difference in CIMT progression between rosuvastatin and placebo) and its corresponding standard error.
Data of duplicate ultrasound examinations at baseline and end of study were available for 688 participants (70% of 984). The ICC based on duplicate baseline examinations ranged from 0.81 to 0.95. CIMT progression rates in the placebo group ranged from 0.0046 to 0.0177 mm/year, with SE ranging from 0.00134 to 0.00337. Treatment effects ranged from 0.0141 to 0.0388 mm/year. The protocols with highest reproducibility, highest CIMT progression/precision ratio and highest treatment effect/precision ratio were those measuring both near and far wall for at least two angles.
Ultrasound protocols that include CIMT measurements at multiple angles of both near and far wall give the best balance between reproducibility, rate of CIMT progression, treatment effect and their associated precision in this low-risk population with subclinical atherosclerosis.
Carotid intima–media thickness (CIMT) is a noninvasive alternative marker of atherosclerotic disease that has been used for the last 25 years with a growing number of publications every year. CIMT is widely used in observational population-based studies to study determinants of atherosclerosis and its consequences for cardiovascular events [1–28]. Change in CIMT over time is currently used as a primary outcome in intervention studies to provide guidance for anticipated outcome in cardiovascular events trials [29–31]. Although CIMT measurements have been performed for years in several studies and settings, considerable differences exist between ultrasound protocols . The most commonly used ultrasound protocols allow CIMT measurements to be taken from combinations of segments [common carotid artery (CCA); CCA and bifurcation (BIF); CCA, BIF and internal carotid artery (ICA)], walls (far wall; near and far wall) and angles (single angle or a combinations of several angles). With these measurements one can estimate at least two different outcome measures: the mean common CIMT and the mean maximum CIMT. The mean common CIMT is generally estimated as the average value of the mean CIMT measurement that is performed over a 10mm length of the far wall or both the far and near wall of the CCA segment. The mean maximum CIMT is a summary measure that is computed as the mean of the single maximum CIMT measurements that are measured in 4–12 standard carotid artery wall segments: the far wall or both the far and near walls of the two or three distinct carotid segments: CCA, BIF and ICA segment of both the left and right sides.
The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in methodological aspects between ultrasound protocols using data from the Measuring Effects on intima-media Thickness: an Evaluation Of Rosuvastatin (METEOR) study, a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the effect of rosuvastatin on CIMT progression in 984 low coronary heart disease (CHD) risk individuals with increased CIMT.
The intraclass correlation (ICC) of the CIMT measurements ranged from 0.829 to 0.945 for mean common CIMT protocols, and from 0.805 to 0.924 for the mean maximum CIMT protocols. Protocols assessing all three segments had higher ICC than two segment protocols.
CIMT progression over time
CIMT progression rate ranged from 0.0046 to 0.0177 mm/year (SE 0.00134-0.00337). The protocols with measurements of both walls for at least two angles had the highest ratios in the mean common CIMT protocols.
The effect of treatment on CIMT progression as compared to placebo ranged from -0.0138 to -0.0205 mm/year for the mean common CIMT protocols and from -0.0141 to -0.0388 mm/year for the mean maximum CIMT protocols. Corresponding treatment/precision ratios ranged from 2.18 to 5.36 and 1.75 to 6.50 for the mean common and the mean maximum CIMT protocols, respectively.
Almost all protocols showed statistically significant treatment effects of rosuvastatin on CIMT progression as compared to placebo.
Overall ranking of ultrasound protocol
Mean maximum CIMT protocols with measurements at both near and far wall for at least three angles were the protocols with the highest overall summation scores.
These findings indicate that the best balance between high reproducibility, large and precise magnitude of rate of CIMT progression over time and the largest and precise magnitude of effect of treatment is achieved with protocols in which both the near and far walls are measured at multiple angles. Mean maximum CIMT protocols overall performed slightly better than mean common CIMT protocols.
1. Pignoli P, Tremoli E, Poli A, Oreste P, Paoletti R. Intimal plus medial thickness of the arterial wall: a direct measurement with ultrasound imaging. Circulation 1986; 74:1399–1406.
2. Prati P, Tosetto A, Vanuzzo D, Bader G, Casaroli M, Canciani L, et al. Carotid intima media thickness and plaques can predict the occurrence of ischemic cerebrovascular events. Stroke 2008; 39:2470–2476.
3. Folsom AR, Kronmal RA, Detrano RC, O’Leary DH, Bild DE, Bluemke DA, et al. Coronary artery calcification compared with carotid intima-media thickness in the prediction of cardiovascular disease incidence: the Multi- Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Arch Intern Med 2008; 168:1333–1339.
4. Corrado E, Rizzo M, Coppola G, Muratori I, Carella M, Novo S. Endothelial dysfunction and carotid lesions are strong predictors of clinical events in patients with early stages of atherosclerosis: a 24-month follow-up study. Coron Artery Dis 2008; 19:139–144.
5. Rundek T, Arif H, Boden-Albala B, Elkind MS, Paik MC, Sacco RL. Carotid plaque, a subclinical precursor of vascular events: the Northern Manhattan Study. Neurology 2008; 70:1200–1207.
6. Newman AB, Naydeck BL, Ives DG, Boudreau RM, Sutton-Tyrrell K, O’Leary DH, Kuller LH. Coronary artery calcium, carotid artery wall thickness, and cardiovascular disease outcomes in adults 70 to 99 years old. Am J Cardiol 2008; 101:186–192.
7. Li C, Engstro¨m G, Berglund G, Janzon L, Hedblad B. Incidence of ischemic stroke in relation to asymptomatic carotid artery atherosclerosis in subjects with normal blood pressure. A prospective cohort study. Cerebrovasc Dis 2008; 26:297–303.
8. Johnsen SH, Mathiesen EB, Joakimsen O, Stensland E, Wilsgaard T, Løchen ML, et al. Carotid atherosclerosis is a stronger predictor of myocardial infarction in women than in men: a 6-year follow-up study of 6226 persons: the Tromsø Study. Stroke 2007; 38:2873–2880.
9. Price JF, Tzoulaki I, Lee AJ, Fowkes FG. Ankle brachial index and intima media thickness predict cardiovascular events similarly and increased prediction when combined. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60:1067–1075.
10. Cao JJ, Arnold AM, Manolio TA, Polak JF, Psaty BM, Hirsch CH, et al. Association of carotid artery intima-media thickness, plaques, and Creactive protein with future cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality: the Cardiovascular Health Study. Circulation 2007; 116:32–38.
11. Kalogeropoulos A, Terzis G, Chrysanthopoulou A, Hahalis G, Siablis D, Alexopoulos D. Risk for transient ischemic attacks is mainly determined by intima-media thickness and carotid plaque echogenicity. Atherosclerosis 2007; 192:190–196.
12. Baldassarre D, Amato M, Pustina L, Castelnuovo S, Sanvito S, Gerosa L, et al. Measurement of carotid artery intima-media thickness in dyslipidemic patients increases the power of traditional risk factors to predict cardiovascular events. Atherosclerosis 2007; 191:403–408.
13. Eigenbrodt ML, Sukhija R, Rose KM, Tracy RE, Couper DJ, Evans GW, et al. Common carotid artery wall thickness and external diameter as predictors of prevalent and incident cardiac events in a large population study. Cardiovasc Ultrasound 2007; 5:11.
14. Ali YS, Rembold KE, Weaver B, Wills MB, Tatar S, Ayers CR, Rembold CM. Prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events by age-normalized carotid intimal medial thickness. Atherosclerosis 2006; 187:186–190.
15. Lorenz MW, von Kegler S, Steinmetz H, Markus HS, Sitzer M. Carotid intima-media thickening indicates a higher vascular risk across a wide age range: prospective data from the Carotid Atherosclerosis Progression Study (CAPS). Stroke 2006; 37:87–92.
16. Murakami S, Otsuka K, Hotta N, Yamanaka G, Kubo Y, Matsuoka O, et al. Common carotid intima-media thickness is predictive of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in elderly community-dwelling people: Longitudinal Investigation for the Longevity and Aging in Hokkaido County (LILAC) study. Biomed Pharmacother 2005; 59 (Suppl 1):S49–53.
17. Rosvall M, Janzon L, Berglund G, Engstro¨m G, Hedblad B. Incident coronary events and case fatality in relation to common carotid intimamedia thickness. J Intern Med 2005; 257:430–437.
18. Kitamura A, Iso H, Imano H, Ohira T, Okada T, Sato S, et al. Carotid intimamedia thickness and plaque characteristics as a risk factor for stroke in Japanese elderly men. Stroke 2004; 35:2788–2794.
19. Störk S, van den Beld AW, von Schacky C, Angermann CE, Lamberts SW, Grobbee DE, Bots ML. Carotid artery plaque burden, stiffness, and mortality risk in elderly men: a prospective, population-based cohort study. Circulation 2004; 110:344–348.
20. Chambless LE, Heiss G, Shahar E, Earp MJ, Toole J. Prediction of ischemic stroke risk in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. Am J Epidemiol 2004; 160:259–269.
21. Chambless LE, Folsom AR, Sharrett AR, Sorlie P, Couper D, Szklo M, Nieto FJ. Coronary heart disease risk prediction in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56:880–890.
22. Iglesias del Sol A, Bots ML, Grobbee DE, Hofman A, Witteman JC. Carotid intima-media thickness at different sites: relation to incident myocardial infarction: The Rotterdam Study. Eur Heart J 2002; 23:934–940.
23. Belcaro G, Nicolaides AN, Ramaswami G, Cesarone MR, De Sanctis M, Incandela L, et al. Carotid and femoral ultrasound morphology screening and cardiovascular events in low risk subjects: a 10-year follow-up study (the CAFES-CAVE study (1)). Atherosclerosis 2001; 156:379–387.
24. Parrinello G, Barbagallo CM, Pinto A, Amato P, Cecala MG, Noto D, et al. Carotid atherosclerosis in hypercholesterolemic patients: relationship with cardiovascular events. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2001; 11:96–103.
25. Chambless LE, Folsom AR, Clegg LX, Sharrett AR, Shahar E, Nieto FJ, et al. Carotid wall thickness is predictive of incident clinical stroke: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Am J Epidemiol 2000; 151:478–487.
26. O’Leary DH, Polak JF, Kronmal RA, Manolio TA, Burke GL, Wolfson SK Jr. Cardiovascular Health Study Collaborative ResearchGroup. Carotid-artery intima and media thickness as a risk factor for myocardial infarction and stroke in older adults. N Engl J Med 1999; 340:14–22.
27. Bots ML, Hoes AW, Koudstaal PJ, Hofman A, Grobbee DE. Common carotid intima-media thickness and risk of stroke and myocardial infarction: the Rotterdam Study. Circulation 1997; 96:1432–1437.
28. Salonen JT, Salonen R. Ultrasonographically assessed carotid morphology and the risk of coronary heart disease. Arterioscler Thromb 1991;11:1245–1249.
29. Revkin JH, Shear CL, Pouleur HG, Ryder SW, Orloff DG. Biomarkers in the prevention and treatment of atherosclerosis: need, validation, and future. Pharmacol Rev 2007; 59:40–53.
30. Wang JG, Staessen JA, Li Y, Van Bortel LM, Nawrot T, Fagard R, et al. Carotid intima-media thickness and antihypertensive treatment: a metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. Stroke 2006; 37:1933–1940.
31. Yokoyama H, Katakami N, Yamasaki Y. Recent advances of intervention to inhibit progression of carotid intima-media thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Stroke 2006; 37:2420–2427.
32. Bots ML, Evans GW, Riley W, Grobbee DE. Carotid intima-media thickness measurements in intervention studies. Designs options, progression rates and sample size considerations: a point of view. Stroke 2003; 34:2985–2994.