Subclinical coronary atherosclerosis identified by coronary computed tomographic angiography in asymptomatic morbidly obese patients

Obesity is a common public health problem and obese individuals in particular have a disproportionate incidence of acute coronary events. This study was undertaken to identify coronary artery lesions as well as associated clinical features, risk factors and demographics in patients with a body mass index (BMI) >40 kg/m2 without known coronary artery disease (CAD). Morbidly obese subjects were prospectively recruited to undergo coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) using a dual-source computed tomography (CT) system. CAD was defined as the presence of any atherosclerotic lesion in any one coronary artery segment. The presence, location, and severity of atherosclerosis were related to patient characteristics. Forty-one patients (28 women, mean age, 50.4±10.0 years, mean BMI, 43.8±4.8 kg/m2) served as the study population. Of these, 25 patients (61%) had at least one coronary stenosis. All but 2 patients within the CAD cohort had coronary artery calcium (CAC) scores >0, and most plaques identified (75.4%) were non-calcified. There was a predilection of calcified and non-calcified atherosclerosis involving the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery compared with other coronary segments. Univariate predictors of CAD included older age, dyslipidemia, and diabetes. In this preliminary study of young morbidly obese patients, CCTA detected a high prevalence of calcified and non-calcified CAD, although the later predominated

Automatic segmentation of multiple cardiovascular structures from cardiac computed tomography angiography images using deep learning.

OBJECTIVES:To develop, demonstrate and evaluate an automated deep learning method for multiple cardiovascular structure segmentation. BACKGROUND:Segmentation of cardiovascular images is resource-intensive. We design an automated deep learning method for the segmentation of multiple structures from Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA) images. METHODS:Images from a multicenter registry of patients that underwent clinically-indicated CCTA were used. The proximal ascending and descending aorta (PAA, DA), superior and inferior vena cavae (SVC, IVC), pulmonary artery (PA), coronary sinus (CS), right ventricular wall (RVW) and left atrial wall (LAW) were annotated as ground truth. The U-net-derived deep learning model was trained, validated and tested in a 70:20:10 split. RESULTS:The dataset comprised 206 patients, with 5.130 billion pixels. Mean age was 59.9 ± 9.4 yrs., and was 42.7% female. An overall median Dice score of 0.820 (0.782, 0.843) was achieved. Median Dice scores for PAA, DA, SVC, IVC, PA, CS, RVW and LAW were 0.969 (0.979, 0.988), 0.953 (0.955, 0.983), 0.937 (0.934, 0.965), 0.903 (0.897, 0.948), 0.775 (0.724, 0.925), 0.720 (0.642, 0.809), 0.685 (0.631, 0.761) and 0.625 (0.596, 0.749) respectively. Apart from the CS, there were no significant differences in performance between sexes or age groups. CONCLUSIONS:An automated deep learning model demonstrated segmentation of multiple cardiovascular structures from CCTA images with reasonable overall accuracy when evaluated on a pixel level

Machine Learning Framework to Identify Individuals at Risk of Rapid Progression of Coronary Atherosclerosis: From the PARADIGM Registry.

Background Rapid coronary plaque progression (RPP) is associated with incident cardiovascular events. To date, no method exists for the identification of individuals at risk of RPP at a single point in time. This study integrated coronary computed tomography angiography-determined qualitative and quantitative plaque features within a machine learning (ML) framework to determine its performance for predicting RPP. Methods and Results Qualitative and quantitative coronary computed tomography angiography plaque characterization was performed in 1083 patients who underwent serial coronary computed tomography angiography from the PARADIGM (Progression of Atherosclerotic Plaque Determined by Computed Tomographic Angiography Imaging) registry. RPP was defined as an annual progression of percentage atheroma volume ≥1.0%. We employed the following ML models: model 1, clinical variables; model 2, model 1 plus qualitative plaque features; model 3, model 2 plus quantitative plaque features. ML models were compared with the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk score, Duke coronary artery disease score, and a logistic regression statistical model. 224 patients (21%) were identified as RPP. Feature selection in ML identifies that quantitative computed tomography variables were higher-ranking features, followed by qualitative computed tomography variables and clinical/laboratory variables. ML model 3 exhibited the highest discriminatory performance to identify individuals who would experience RPP when compared with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk score, the other ML models, and the statistical model (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in ML model 3, 0.83 [95% CI 0.78-0.89], versus atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk score, 0.60 [0.52-0.67]; Duke coronary artery disease score, 0.74 [0.68-0.79]; ML model 1, 0.62 [0.55-0.69]; ML model 2, 0.73 [0.67-0.80]; all P<0.001; statistical model, 0.81 [0.75-0.87], P=0.128). Conclusions Based on a ML framework, quantitative atherosclerosis characterization has been shown to be the most important feature when compared with clinical, laboratory, and qualitative measures in identifying patients at risk of RPP

Clinical risk factors and atherosclerotic plaque extent to define risk for major events in patients without obstructive coronary artery disease: the long-term coronary computed tomography angiography CONFIRM registry.

AimsIn patients without obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), we examined the prognostic value of risk factors and atherosclerotic extent.Methods and resultsPatients from the long-term CONFIRM registry without prior CAD and without obstructive (≥50%) stenosis were included. Within the groups of normal coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) (N = 1849) and non-obstructive CAD (N = 1698), the prognostic value of traditional clinical risk factors and atherosclerotic extent (segment involvement score, SIS) was assessed with Cox models. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or late revascularization. In total, 3547 patients were included (age 57.9 ± 12.1 years, 57.8% male), experiencing 460 MACE during 5.4 years of follow-up. Age, body mass index, hypertension, and diabetes were the clinical variables associated with increased MACE risk, but the magnitude of risk was higher for CCTA defined atherosclerotic extent; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for SIS >5 was 3.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3-4.9) while HR for diabetes and hypertension were 1.7 (95% CI 1.3-2.2) and 1.4 (95% CI 1.1-1.7), respectively. Exclusion of revascularization as endpoint did not modify the results. In normal CCTA, presence of ≥1 traditional risk factors did not worsen prognosis (log-rank P = 0.248), while it did in non-obstructive CAD (log-rank P = 0.025). Adjusted for SIS, hypertension and diabetes predicted MACE risk in non-obstructive CAD, while diabetes did not increase risk in absence of CAD (P-interaction = 0.004).ConclusionAmong patients without obstructive CAD, the extent of CAD provides more prognostic information for MACE than traditional cardiovascular risk factors. An interaction was observed between risk factors and CAD burden, suggesting synergistic effects of both

Coronary atherosclerosis scoring with semiquantitative CCTA risk scores for prediction of major adverse cardiac events: Propensity score-based analysis of diabetic and non-diabetic patients.

AIMS:We aimed to compare semiquantitative coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) risk scores - which score presence, extent, composition, stenosis and/or location of coronary artery disease (CAD) - and their prognostic value between patients with and without diabetes mellitus (DM). Risk scores derived from general chest-pain populations are often challenging to apply in DM patients, because of numerous confounders. METHODS:Out of a combined cohort from the Leiden University Medical Center and the CONFIRM registry with 5-year follow-up data, we performed a secondary analysis in diabetic patients with suspected CAD who were clinically referred for CCTA. A total of 732 DM patients was 1:1 propensity-matched with 732 non-DM patients by age, sex and cardiovascular risk factors. A subset of 7 semiquantitative CCTA risk scores was compared between groups: 1) any stenosis ≥50%, 2) any stenosis ≥70%, 3) stenosis-severity component of the coronary artery disease-reporting and data system (CAD-RADS), 4) segment involvement score (SIS), 5) segment stenosis score (SSS), 6) CT-adapted Leaman score (CT-LeSc), and 7) Leiden CCTA risk score. Cox-regression analysis was performed to assess the association between the scores and the primary endpoint of all-cause death and non-fatal myocardial infarction. Also, area under the receiver-operating characteristics curves were compared to evaluate discriminatory ability. RESULTS:A total of 1,464 DM and non-DM patients (mean age 58 ± 12 years, 40% women) underwent CCTA and 155 (11%) events were documented after median follow-up of 5.1 years. In DM patients, the 7 semiquantitative CCTA risk scores were significantly more prevalent or higher as compared to non-DM patients (p ≤ 0.022). All scores were independently associated with the primary endpoint in both patients with and without DM (p ≤ 0.020), with non-significant interaction between the scores and diabetes (interaction p ≥ 0.109). Discriminatory ability of the Leiden CCTA risk score in DM patients was significantly better than any stenosis ≥50% and ≥70% (p = 0.003 and p = 0.007, respectively), but comparable to the CAD-RADS, SIS, SSS and CT-LeSc that also focus on the extent of CAD (p ≥ 0.265). CONCLUSION:Coronary atherosclerosis scoring with semiquantitative CCTA risk scores incorporating the total extent of CAD discriminate major adverse cardiac events well, and might be useful for risk stratification of patients with DM beyond the binary evaluation of obstructive stenosis alone

CAD-RADS™ 2.0 - 2022 Coronary Artery Disease – Reporting and Data System an expert consensus document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American College of Radiology (ACR) and the North America society of cardiovascular imaging (NASCI)

Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) was created to standardize reporting system for patients undergoing coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and to guide possible next steps in patient management. The goal of this updated 2022 CAD-RADS 2.0 is to improve the initial reporting system for CCTA by considering new technical developments in Cardiac CT, including data from recent clinical trials and new clinical guidelines. The updated CAD-RADS classification will follow an established framework of stenosis, plaque burden, and modifiers, which will include assessment of lesion-specific ischemia using CT fractional-flow-reserve (CT-FFR) or myocardial CT perfusion (CTP), when performed. Similar to the method used in the original CAD-RADS version, the determinant for stenosis severity classification will be the most severe coronary artery luminal stenosis on a per-patient basis, ranging from CAD-RADS 0 (zero) for absence of any plaque or stenosis to CAD-RADS 5 indicating the presence of at least one totally occluded coronary artery. Given the increasing data supporting the prognostic relevance of coronary plaque burden, this document will provide various methods to estimate and report total plaque burden. The addition of P1 to P4 descriptors are used to denote increasing categories of plaque burden. The main goal of CAD-RADS, which should always be interpreted together with the impression found in the report, remains to facilitate communication of test results with referring physicians along with suggestions for subsequent patient management. In addition, CAD-RADS will continue to provide a framework of standardization that may benefit education, research, peer-review, artificial intelligence development, clinical trial design, population health and quality assurance with the ultimate goal of improving patient care

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Alone in the Absence of Subsequent Diabetes Is Associated With Microalbuminuria: Results from the Kidney Early Evaluation Program (KEEP)

OBJECTIVE Women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) maintain a higher risk for recurrent GDM and overt diabetes. Overt diabetes is a risk factor for development of chronic kidney disease (CKD), but GDM alone, without subsequent development of overt diabetes, may also pose a risk for CKD

Current but not past smoking increases the risk of cardiac events: insights from coronary computed tomographic angiography

Aims We evaluated coronary artery disease (CAD) extent, severity, and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in never, past, and current smokers undergoing coronary CT angiography (CCTA). Methods and results We evaluated 9456 patients (57.1 ± 12.3 years, 55.5% male) without known CAD (1588 current smokers; 2183 past smokers who quit ≥3 months before CCTA; and 5685 never smokers). By risk-adjusted Cox proportional-hazards models, we related smoking status to MACE (all-cause death or non-fatal myocardial infarction). We further performed 1:1:1 propensity matching for 1000 in each group evaluate event risk among individuals with similar age, gender, CAD risk factors, and symptom presentation. During a mean follow-up of 2.8 ± 1.9 years, 297 MACE occurred. Compared with never smokers, current and past smokers had greater atherosclerotic burden including extent of plaque defined as segments with any plaque (2.1 ± 2.8 vs. 2.6 ± 3.2 vs. 3.1 ± 3.3, P < 0.0001) and prevalence of obstructive CAD [1-vessel disease (VD): 10.6% vs. 14.9% vs. 15.2%, P < 0.001; 2-VD: 4.4% vs. 6.1% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.001; 3-VD: 3.1% vs. 5.2% vs. 4.3%, P < 0.001]. Compared with never smokers, current smokers experienced higher MACE risk [hazard ratio (HR) 1.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-2.6, P < 0.001], while past smokers did not (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.8-1.6, P = 0.35). Among matched individuals, current smokers had higher MACE risk (HR 2.6, 95% CI 1.6-4.2, P < 0.001), while past smokers did not (HR 1.3, 95% CI 0.7-2.4, P = 0.39). Similar findings were observed for risk of all-cause death. Conclusion Among patients without known CAD undergoing CCTA, current and past smokers had increased burden of atherosclerosis compared with never smokers; however, risk of MACE was heightened only in current smoker

All-cause mortality benefit of coronary revascularization vs. medical therapy in patients without known coronary artery disease undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography: results from CONFIRM (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter Registry)

Aims To date, the therapeutic benefit of revascularization vs. medical therapy for stable individuals undergoing invasive coronary angiography (ICA) based upon coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) findings has not been examined. Methods and results We examined 15 223 patients without known coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing CCTA from eight sites and six countries who were followed for median 2.1 years (interquartile range 1.4-3.3 years) for an endpoint of all-cause mortality. Obstructive CAD by CCTA was defined as a ≥50% luminal diameter stenosis in a major coronary artery. Patients were categorized as having high-risk CAD vs. non-high-risk CAD, with the former including patients with at least obstructive two-vessel CAD with proximal left anterior descending artery involvement, three-vessel CAD, and left main CAD. Death occurred in 185 (1.2%) patients. Patients were categorized into two treatment groups: revascularization (n = 1103; 2.2% mortality) and medical therapy (n = 14 120, 1.1% mortality). To account for non-randomized referral to revascularization, we created a propensity score developed by logistic regression to identify variables that influenced the decision to refer to revascularization. Within this model (C index 0.92, χ2 = 1248, P < 0.0001), obstructive CAD was the most influential factor for referral, followed by an interaction of obstructive CAD with pre-test likelihood of CAD (P = 0.0344). Within CCTA CAD groups, rates of revascularization increased from 3.8% for non-high-risk CAD to 51.2% high-risk CAD. In multivariable models, when compared with medical therapy, revascularization was associated with a survival advantage for patients with high-risk CAD [hazards ratio (HR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.83], with no difference in survival for patients with non-high-risk CAD (HR 3.24, 95% CI 0.76-13.89) (P-value for interaction = 0.03). Conclusion In an intermediate-term follow-up, coronary revascularization is associated with a survival benefit in patients with high-risk CAD by CCTA, with no apparent benefit of revascularization in patients with lesser forms of CA