Cited by 2,977Cardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Prediction of Clinical Cardiovascular Events With Carotid Intima-Media Thickness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lorenz, Matthias W., Markus, Hugh S., Bots, Michiel L., Rosvall, Maria, Sitzer, Matthias·2007·Circulation

Abstract

Background— Carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) is increasingly used as a surrogate marker for atherosclerosis. Its use relies on its ability to predict future clinical cardiovascular end points. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of data to examine this association. Methods and Results— Using a prespecified search strategy, we identified 8 relevant studies and compared study design, measurement protocols, and reported data. We identified sources of heterogeneity between studies. The assumption of a linear relationship between IMT and risk was challenged by use of a graphical technique. To obtain a pooled estimate of the relative risk per IMT difference, we performed a meta-analysis based on random effects models. The age- and sex-adjusted overall estimates of the relative risk of myocardial infarction were 1.26 (95% CI, 1.21 to 1.30) per 1–standard deviation common carotid artery IMT difference and 1.15 (95% CI, 1.12 to 1.17) per 0.10-mm common carotid artery IMT difference. The age- and sex-adjusted relative risks of stroke were 1.32 (95% CI, 1.27 to 1.38) per 1–standard deviation common carotid artery IMT difference and 1.18 (95% CI, 1.16 to 1.21) per 0.10-mm common carotid artery IMT difference. Major sources of heterogeneity were age distribution, carotid segment definition, and IMT measurement protocol. The relationship between IMT and risk was nonlinear, but the linear models fitted relatively well for moderate to high IMT values. Conclusions— Carotid IMT is a strong predictor of future vascular events. The relative risk per IMT difference is slightly higher for the end point stroke than for myocardial infarction. In future IMT studies, ultrasound protocols should be aligned with published studies. Data for younger individuals are limited and more studies are required.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.106.628875

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lorenz, M. W., Markus, H. S., Bots, M. L., Rosvall, M., & Sitzer, M.
Affiliations
Goethe University Frankfurt (DE)
Venue
Circulation
Published
2007-01-30
Volume
115
Issue
4
Pages
459-467
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2072751592
Cited by
2,977
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 87 · 2025: 74 · 2024: 88 · 2023: 120 · 2022: 121 · 2021: 134 · 2020: 159 · 2019: 137 · 2018: 163 · 2017: 156 · 2016: 185 · 2015: 210 · 2014: 212 · 2013: 242 · 2012: 204
FWCI
107.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Circulation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Washington
  • University of Oxford
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
carotid intima-media thickness, cardiovascular risk prediction, myocardial infarction, stroke, atherosclerosis, common carotid artery, surrogate markers
MeSH terms
Carotid Arteries, Carotid Artery Diseases, Humans, Myocardial Infarction, Predictive Value of Tests, Risk Factors, Tunica Intima, Tunica Media, Stroke

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review