Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Coronary atherosclerotic burden vs. coronary vascular function in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with normal myocardial perfusion: a propensity score analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the relationship between coronary atherosclerotic burden and vascular function in diabetic and nondiabetic patients after balancing for coronary risk factors.

Methods

We studied 672 patients without overt coronary artery disease and normal myocardial perfusion on stress 82Rb PET/CT imaging. To account for differences in baseline characteristics between diabetic patients and nondiabetic patients, we created a propensity score-matched cohort considering clinical variables and coronary risk factors.

Results

Before matching, diabetic patients had higher coronary artery calcium (CAC) scores (p < 0.001) and lower coronary flow reserve (CFR; p < 0.001) than nondiabetic patients. After matching, CAC scores were comparable between diabetic and nondiabetic patients, but diabetic patients still had lower hyperaemic myocardial blood flow (p < 0.001) and CFR (p < 0.05). Patients were categorized by ln(CAC score) quartiles. There was a decrease in CFR with increasing CAC score quartile in both diabetic patients (p for trend < 0.01) and nondiabetic patients (p for trend < 0.005). Diabetes was associated with lower CFR across quartile categories (p < 0.002). In a multivariable linear regression analysis, CAC score was inversely related to CFR in both diabetic patients (p < 0.05) and nondiabetic patients (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Diabetic patients had higher CAC scores than nondiabetic patients, but the difference disappeared when clinical characteristics were taken into account. Of note, diabetic patients also had lower CFR regardless of CAC score than nondiabetic patients after matching. Thus, coronary atherosclerotic burden and vascular function have to be seen as two different entities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Berry C, Tardif JC, Bourassa MG. Coronary heart disease in patients with diabetes. Part I: recent advances in prevention and noninvasive management. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:631–642.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Murthy VL, Naya M, Foster CR, Gaber M, Hainer J, Klein J, et al. Association between coronary vascular dysfunction and cardiac mortality in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Circulation. 2012;126:1858–1868.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. von Scholten BJ, Hasbak P, Christensen TE, Ghotbi AA, Kjaer A, Rossing P, et al. Cardiac (82)Rb PET/CT for fast and non-invasive assessment of microvascular function and structure in asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia. 2016;59:371–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Schindler TH, Cadenas J, Facta AD, Li Y, Olschewski M, Sayre J, et al. Improvement in coronary endothelial function is independently associated with a slowed progression of coronary artery calcification in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:3064–3073.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Sangiorgi G, Rumberger JA, Severson A, Edwards WD, Gregoire J, Fitzpatrick LA, et al. Arterial calcification and not lumen stenosis is highly correlated with atherosclerotic plaque burden in humans: a histologic study of 723 coronary artery segments using nondecalcifying methodology. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;31:126–133.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mielke CH, Shields JP, Broemeling LD. Coronary artery calcium, coronary artery disease, and diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2001;53:55–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Khazai B, Luo Y, Rosenberg S, Wingrove J, Budoff MJ. Coronary atherosclerotic plaque detected by computed tomographic angiography in subjects with diabetes compared to those without diabetes. PLoS One. 2015;10, e0143187.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Curillova Z, Yaman BF, Dorbala S, Kwong RY, Sitek A, El Fakhri G, et al. Quantitative relationship between coronary calcium content and coronary flow reserve as assessed by integrated PET/CT imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:1603–1610.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Assante R, Zampella E, Arumugam P, Acampa W, Imbriaco M, Tout D, et al. Quantitative relationship between coronary artery calcium and myocardial blood flow by hybrid rubidium-82 PET/CT imaging in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016. doi:10.1007/s12350-015-0359-1.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Camici PG, Crea F. Coronary microvascular dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:830–840.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rosendorff C, Black HR, Cannon CP, Gersh BJ, Gore J, Izzo Jr JL, et al. Treatment of hypertension in the prevention and management of ischemic heart disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council for High Blood Pressure Research and the Councils on Clinical Cardiology and Epidemiology and Prevention. Circulation. 2007;115:2761–2788.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, Jacobs AK, Kaul S, Laskey WK, et al. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2002;105:539–542.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Klein R, Renaud JM, Ziadi MC, Thorn SL, Adler A, Beanlands RS, et al. Intra- and inter-operator repeatability of myocardial blood flow and myocardial flow reserve measurements using rubidium-82 PET and a highly automated analysis program. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:600–616.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hildner FJ, Zusmer NR, Viamonte Jr M, Detrano R. Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1990;15:827–832.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Heinze G, Jüni P. An overview of the objectives of and the approaches to propensity score analyses. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:1704–1708.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Austin PC. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med. 2009;28:3083–3107.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Leuven E, Sianesi B. PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. Statistical Software Components S432001. Chestnut Hill: Boston College, Department of Economics; 2003 (revised 19 July 2012).

  18. Petretta M, Acampa W, Evangelista L, Daniele S, Ferro A, Cuocolo A; Impact of Inducible Ischemia by Stress SPECT (IDIS) Investigators. Impact of inducible ischemia by stress SPECT in cardiac risk assessment in diabetic patients: rationale and design of a prospective, multicenter trial. J Nucl Cardiol. 2008;15:100–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Acampa W, Petretta M, Cuocolo R, Daniele S, Cantoni V, Cuocolo A. Warranty period of normal stress myocardial perfusion imaging in diabetic patients: a propensity score analysis. J Nucl Cardiol. 2014;21:50–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Acampa W, Petretta M, Daniele S, Del Prete G, Assante R, Zampella E, et al. Incremental prognostic value of stress myocardial perfusion imaging in asymptomatic diabetic patients. Atherosclerosis. 2013;227(2):307–312.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Appelman YE, Harms HJ, de Haan S, van den Oever ML, et al. Coronary risk factors and myocardial blood flow in patients evaluated for coronary artery disease: a quantitative [15O]H2O PET/CT study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:102–112.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schindler TH, Facta AD, Prior JO, Cadenas J, Zhang XL, Li Y, et al. Structural alterations of the coronary arterial wall are associated with myocardial flow heterogeneity in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:219–229.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Appelman YE, Harms HJ, de Haan S, Marques KM, et al. Quantitative relationship between coronary artery calcium score and hyperemic myocardial blood flow as assessed by hybrid 15O-water PET/CT imaging in patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol. 2012;19:256–264.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang L, Jerosch-Herold M, Jacobs Jr DR, Shahar E, Detrano R, Folsom AR. Coronary artery calcification and myocardial perfusion in asymptomatic adults: the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:1018–1026.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alberto Cuocolo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the principles of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Assante, R., Acampa, W., Zampella, E. et al. Coronary atherosclerotic burden vs. coronary vascular function in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with normal myocardial perfusion: a propensity score analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44, 1129–1135 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3671-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3671-y

Keywords

Navigation