Why the study?
Does the combination of airflow limitation and smoking increase the severity of carotid atherosclerosis in patients with coronary artery disease?
Does the combination of airflow limitation and smoking increase the severity of carotid atherosclerosis in patients with coronary artery disease?
The combination of smoking and airflow limitation is independently associated with severe carotid atherosclerosis in patients with coronary artery disease, highlighting a high-risk subgroup.
May flag high-risk CAD patients for closer monitoring; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Both airflow limitation and smoking are established cardiovascular risk factors. However, their interaction as risk factors for the development of atherosclerosis in coronary artery disease patients remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of the interaction between airflow limitation and smoking status on the severity of carotid atherosclerosis. METHODS: We categorized the 234 enrolled patients with coronary artery disease into four groups: never-smokers with normal pulmonary function (group A), never-smokers with airflow limitation (group B), ever-smokers with normal pulmonary function (group C), and ever-smokers with airflow limitation (group D). RESULTS: The prevalence of airflow limitation in the enrolled patients was 23.1% (ever-smokers: 15.8%, never-smokers: 7.3%). The prevalence of severe carotid atherosclerosis was 28.2, 29.4, 41.3, and 45.9%, respectively, in the four groups (group D vs. group A, p = 0.035). Even after multivariate adjusting for confounding factors, ever-smokers with airflow limitation were independently associated with severe carotid atherosclerosis (odds ratio 2.89, 95% confidence interval, 1.19-7.00, p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Ever-smokers with airflow limitation were significantly associated with severe carotid atherosclerosis among patients with coronary artery disease. These findings also provide additional insight into the correlation between airflow limitation and poor cardiovascular clinical outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hamrah et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: