Performance of the recommended ESC/EASD cardiovascular risk stratification model in comparison to SCORE and NT-proBNP as a single biomarker for risk prediction in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Cardiovascular Diabetology

Guido Strunk¹  Suriya Prausmüller²  Georg Spinka²  Philipp E. Bartko²  Noemi Pavo²  Georg Goliasch²  Henrike Arfsten²  Raphael Wurm²  Martin Hülsmann²  Michael Resl³  Martin Clodi³  Stephanie Neuhold⁴ 

[1] Complexity Research, Schönbrunner Straße 32, 1050, Vienna, Austria;Department of Internal Medicine II, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria;Department of Internal Medicine, Saint John of God Hospital Linz, Seilerstaette 2, 4021, Linz, Austria;Department of Medicine IV, Clinic Favoriten, Kundratstraße 3, 1100, Vienna, Austria;

关键词: Diabetes mellitus;    Cardiovascular risk;    Prevention;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12933-021-01221-w

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundRecently, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Association for the Society of Diabetes (EASD) introduced a new cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk stratification model to aid further treatment decisions in individuals with diabetes. Our study aimed to investigate the prognostic performance of the ESC/EASD risk model in comparison to the Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) risk model and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in an unselected cohort of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).Methods and resultsA total of 1690 T2DM patients with a 10-year follow up for fatal CVD and all-cause death and a 5-year follow up for CVD and all-cause hospitalizations were analyzed. According to ESC/EASD risk criteria 25 (1.5%) patients were classified as moderate, 252 (14.9%) high, 1125 (66.6%) very high risk and 288 (17.0%) were not classifiable. Both NT-proBNP and SCORE risk model were associated with 10-year CVD and all-cause death and 5-year CVD and all-cause hospitalizations while the ESC/EASD model was only associated with 10-year all-cause death and 5-year all-cause hospitalizations. NT-proBNP and SCORE showed significantly higher C-indices than the ESC/EASD risk model for CVD death [0.80 vs. 0.53, p < 0.001; 0.64 vs. 0.53, p = 0.001] and all-cause death [0.73, 0.66 vs. 0.52, p < 0.001 for both]. The performance of SCORE improved in a subgroup without CVD aged 40–64 years compared to the unselected cohort, while NT-proBNP performance was robust across all groups.ConclusionThe new introduced ESC/EASD risk stratification model performed limited compared to SCORE and single NT-proBNP assessment for predicting 10-year CVD and all-cause fatal events in individuals with T2DM.

【 授权许可】

CC BY