Why the study?
Risk scores for T2DM underestimate cardiovascular risk in T1DM, driving the need to assess novel risk-estimation tools such as the Steno Type 1 Risk Engine.
Does arterial stiffness (aPWV) correlate with the Steno Type 1 Risk Engine scores in patients with T1DM without established CVD?
Does arterial stiffness (aPWV) correlate with the Steno Type 1 Risk Engine scores in patients with T1DM without established CVD?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Arterial stiffness measured by aortic pulse-wave velocity strongly correlates with the Steno Type 1 Risk Engine score, providing potential cut-offs to identify moderate and high cardiovascular risk in patients with type 1 diabetes.
OBJECTIVES: Currently used risk scores for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) clearly underestimate cardiovascular risk in type 1 diabetes (T1DM). Hence, there is a need to develop novel and specific risk-estimation tools for this population. We aimed to assess the relationship between the Steno Type 1 Risk Engine (ST1RE) and arterial stiffness (AS), and to identify potential cut-off points of interest in clinical practice. DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 179 patients with T1DM (50.8% men, mean age 41.2±13.1 years), without established cardiovascular disease, were evaluated for clinical and anthropometric data (including classical cardiovascular risk factors), and AS measured by aortic pulse-wave velocity (aPWV). The ST1RE was used to estimate 10-year cardiovascular risk and patients were classified into 3 groups: low- (<10%; n = 105), moderate- (10-20%; n = 53) and high-risk (≥20%; n = 21). RESULTS: When compared with the low- and moderate-risk groups, patients in the high-risk group were older, had higher prevalence of hypertension, dyslipidemia and insulin-resistance, and had higher body-mass index and HbA1c. aPWV increased in parallel with estimated cardiovascular risk (6.4±1.0, 8.4±1.3 and 10.3±2.6m/s; p<0.001). As an evaluation of model performance, the C-statistic of aPWV was 0.914 (95% confidence interval [CI]:0.873-0.950) for predicting moderate/high-risk and 0.879 (95%CI:0.809-0.948) for high-risk, according to the ST1RE. The best cut-off points of aPWV were 7.3m/s (sensitivity:86%, specificity:83%) and 8.7m/s (sensitivity:76%, specificity:86%) for moderate/high- and high-risk, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: AS is highly correlated with the scores obtained from the ST1RE. We have identified two cut-off points of AS that can clearly discriminate moderate/high- and high-risk T1DM patients, which could be of great value in clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Llauradó et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: