Copyright
©The Author(s) 2024.
World J Clin Cases. Jun 16, 2024; 12(17): 3004-3011
Published online Jun 16, 2024. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v12.i17.3004
Published online Jun 16, 2024. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v12.i17.3004
Table 1 Comparison of clinical data, n (%)/ mean ± SD
Clinical data | Case group (n = 107) | Control group (n = 41) | t/χ2 value | P value |
Age (yr) | 59.54 ± 10.62 | 59.28 ± 10.53 | 0.134 | 0.893 |
Gender | 0.774 | 0.379 | ||
Male | 62 (57.94) | 27 (65.85) | ||
Female | 45 (42.06) | 14 (34.15) | ||
BMI, kg/m2 | 24.18 ± 1.51 | 23.79 ± 1.26 | 1.469 | 0.144 |
Heart rate, beats/min | 77.43 ± 5.65 | 76.51 ± 5.47 | 0.894 | 0.373 |
Upper and lower diameter of right atrium, mm | 45.17 ± 5.98 | 45.04 ± 5.85 | 0.119 | 0.905 |
Drinking history | 31 (28.97) | 8 (19.51) | 1.367 | 0.242 |
FPG, mmol/L | 5.26 ± 0.35 | 5.18 ± 0.26 | 1.329 | 0.186 |
SBP, mm Hg | 131.84 ± 15.46 | 127.39 ± 10.57 | 1.696 | 0.092 |
DBP, mm Hg | 84.33 ± 8.92 | 81.58 ± 8.06 | 1.722 | 0.087 |
TC, mmol/L | 3.74 ± 0.51 | 3.85 ± 0.62 | 1.104 | 0.271 |
TG, mmol/L | 1.42 ± 0.26 | 1.34 ± 0.23 | 1.727 | 0.086 |
HDL-C, mmol/L | 1.08 ± 0.15 | 1.12 ± 0.17 | 1.398 | 0.164 |
LDL-C, mmol/L | 2.32 ± 0.54 | 2.28 ± 0.51 | 0.409 | 0.683 |
Table 2 Comparison of ultrasound data, mean ± SD
Ultrasound data | Case group (n = 107) | Control group (n = 41) | t value | P value |
β | 9.32 ± 2.75 | 4.18 ± 0.93 | 11.690 | < 0.001 |
EP (kPa) | 117.84 ± 31.49 | 56.92 ± 14.17 | 11.910 | < 0.001 |
PWV-β (m/s) | 7.81 ± 1.27 | 4.95 ± 0.86 | 13.290 | < 0.001 |
CIMT (mm) | 0.97 ± 0.32 | 0.63 ± 0.13 | 6.587 | < 0.001 |
EAT (mm) | 7.48 ± 2.13 | 2.04 ± 0.64 | 16.050 | < 0.001 |
Table 3 Comparison of ultrasonic parameters in patients with coronary heart disease with different lesion counts, mean ± SD
Ultrasonic data | 1-vessel disease (n = 34) | 2-vessel disease (n = 38) | 3-vessel disease (n = 35) | F value | P value |
β | 7.48 ± 2.35 | 9.18 ± 2.72a | 10.99 ± 3.16a,b | 13.901 | < 0.001 |
Ep (kPa) | 89.92 ± 25.06 | 118.24 ± 31.57a | 141.15 ± 35.83a,b | 23.310 | < 0.001 |
PWV-β (m/s) | 6.56 ± 1.04 | 7.79 ± 1.25a | 8.82 ± 1.47a,b | 27.493 | < 0.001 |
CIMT (mm) | 0.75 ± 0.23 | 0.96 ± 0.28a | 1.17 ± 0.34a,b | 18.450 | < 0.001 |
EAT (mm) | 5.19 ± 1.58 | 7.52 ± 2.26a | 9.45 ± 2.87a,b | 29.592 | < 0.001 |
Table 4 Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis results
Index | AUC | 95%CI | Optimal cutoff value | Sensitivity | Specificity |
EAT (mm) | 0.872 | 0.801–0.943 | 6.35 | 0.863 | 0.814 |
CIMT (mm) | 0.826 | 0.760–0.891 | 0.95 | 0.805 | 0.789 |
Carotid artery elasticity | 0.864 | 0.803–0.926 | 0.854 | 0.802 | |
Combination of the three | 0.893 | 0.839–0.947 | 0.890 | 0.837 |
- Citation: Xu M, Lu ZY. Early diagnostic value of carotid artery ultrasound parameters combined with epicardial adipose layer thickness in coronary heart disease. World J Clin Cases 2024; 12(17): 3004-3011
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v12/i17/3004.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v12.i17.3004