Key result
ASL-sCoV was significantly associated with 10-year cardiovascular risk scores at baseline (standardized-beta 0.23; 95% CI 0.10-0.36; P<0.0001) and follow-up, outperforming ASL-CBF and WMH volume.
Why the study?
To test whether the ASL-MRI parameter spatial coefficient of variation is a better radiological marker for atherosclerotic risk than white matter hyperintensity volume and cerebral blood flow.
Does ASL-sCoV correlate better with atherosclerotic risk than ASL-CBF and WMH volume in older adults with systolic hypertension?
Cross-Sectional (n=195)
Does ASL-sCoV correlate better with atherosclerotic risk than ASL-CBF and WMH volume in older adults with systolic hypertension?
Effect estimate: standardized-beta 0.23 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.36)
p-value: p=< 0.0001
ASL-sCoV is a promising MRI marker that correlates better with atherosclerotic risk than conventional markers like ASL-CBF and WMH volume in older adults with systolic hypertension.
Supports investigation of ASL-sCoV for cardiovascular risk assessment in systolic hypertension; leaves open whether it enhances prediction beyond existing markers.
BACKGROUND: Arterial spin labeling (ASL) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be a promising technique to evaluate the presence of cerebral atherosclerosis. We tested whether the new and easily calculated ASL MRI parameter for vascular and tissue signal distribution - 'spatial coefficient of variation' (ASL-sCoV) - is a better radiological marker for atherosclerotic risk than the more conventional markers of white matter hyperintensity (WMH) volume and cerebral blood flow (ASL-CBF). METHODS: Participants of the preDIVA trial (n = 195), aged 72-80 years with systolic hypertension (>140 mmHg) underwent two MRI scans two to three years apart. WMH volume was derived from 3D FLAIR-MRI; gray matter ASL-CBF and ASL-sCoV from ASL-MRI. Atherosclerotic risk was operationalized as 10-year cardiovascular risk by the Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation Older Persons (SCORE O.P) and calculated at baseline and follow-up. Data were analyzed using linear regression. RESULTS: ASL-CBF was associated with atherosclerotic risk scores at baseline (standardized-beta = -0.26, 95 %CI = -0.40 to -0.13, p < 0.001) but not at follow-up (standardized-beta = -0.14, 95 %CI = -0.33 to 0.04, p = 0.12). ASL-sCoV was associated with atherosclerotic risk scores at both time points (baseline standardized-beta = 0.23, 95 %CI = 0.10 to 0.36, p < 0.0001, follow-up standardized beta = 0.20, 95 %CI = 0.03 to 0.36, p = 0.02). WMH volume was not associated with atherosclerotic risk scores at either time-point. There were no longitudinal associations between changes in MRI parameters and baseline atherosclerotic risk scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that ASL-sCoV correlates better with atherosclerotic risk than the more conventional markers ASL-CBF and WMH volume. Our data reaffirm that non-invasive imaging with MRI is highly informative and could provide additional information about cerebrovascular damage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hafdi et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Systolic hypertension and atherosclerotic risk (n=195). ASL-sCoV (spatial coefficient of variation) vs. ASL-CBF and WMH volume was evaluated on 10-year cardiovascular risk by SCORE O.P at baseline (standardized-beta 0.23, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.36, p=< 0.0001). ASL-sCoV was significantly associated with 10-year cardiovascular risk scores at baseline (standardized-beta 0.23; 95% CI 0.10-0.36; P<0.0001) and follow-up, outperforming ASL-CBF and WMH volume.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: