Diastolic dysfunction is a common problem in patients with obesity, hypertension, diabetes, or coronary artery disease. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction with an abnormal coronary artery calcium score (CAC score).
This study considered a cohort of patients ≥18 years of age with normal ejection fraction who were admitted to the hospital with chest pain. All patients underwent regadenoson myocardial perfusion stress imaging and had no evidence of ischemia or infarction. Patients then underwent cardiac CT for measurement of CAC score. Patients were excluded if they had prior history of coronary artery disease, ECG findings diagnostic of an acute coronary syndrome, an elevated troponin level, or hemodynamic instability.
A total of 114 patients were included and 52 (45.6%) patients had echocardiographic evidence of diastolic dysfunction. Patients with diastolic dysfunction were more likely to have an abnormal calcium score (79.6% vs 20%; OR 15.10, 95% CI 5.70 to 43.85; p＜0.001). In multivariable analysis, the presence of diastolic dysfunction on echocardiogram was significantly associated with an abnormal calcium score (OR 13.82, 95% CI 5.57 to 37.37; p＜0.001) after adjusting for Framingham Risk Score or clinical risk factors (age, gender, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, and obesity; OR 19.06,95% CI 4.66 to 107.97; p＜0.001).
Our study demonstrates that left ventricular diastolic dysfunction is associated with an abnormal CAC score even after adjusting for Framingham Risk Score or clinical risk factors. Patients without known coronary artery disease that present with chest pain and have normal perfusion imaging with evidence of abnormal diastolic function on echocardiogram may warrant more thorough evaluation for coronary atherosclerotic disease with CAC score assessment.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 September 2018.
All research outputs
#24,121,174
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis
#579
of 902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,196
of 300,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis
#10
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 902 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,025 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
