Search

IMPORTANCE: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are associated with future cardiovascular disease, perhaps because of subclinical cardiac dysfunction before pregnancy leading to impaired adaptation to pregnancy. Natriuretic peptides are promising biomarkers for detecting subclinical cardiac dysfunction outside of pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether higher concentrations of N-terminal pro–brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in early pregnancy would be associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and hypertension 2 to 7 years post partum. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study used data from the The Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be Heart Health Study, a prospective multicenter observational study. A total of 4103 nulliparous women with complete data and no prepregnancy hypertension or diabetes who were treated at 8 clinical sites were included. Women were followed up with for 2 to 7 years after pregnancy. Data were collected from October 2010 to October 2017, and data were analyzed from August 2020 to November 2021. EXPOSURES: NT-proBNP concentration, measured using an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay from a first-trimester blood sample. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and incident hypertension (systolic blood pressure of 130 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure of 80 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive agents) at follow-up visit. RESULTS: A total of 4103 women met inclusion criteria; the mean (SD) age was 27.0 (5.6) years. Among these women, 909 (22.2%) had an adverse pregnancy outcome, and 817 (19.9%) had hypertension at the follow-up visit. Higher NT-proBNP concentrations were associated with a lower risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (adjusted odds ratio per doubling, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.91), which persisted after adjustment for age, self-reported race and ethnicity, early-pregnancy body mass index, smoking, and aspirin use. Similarly, higher NT-proBNP concentration in early pregnancy was also associated with a lower risk of incident hypertension 2 to 7 years after delivery (adjusted odds ratio per doubling, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.77-0.93), an association that persisted after controlling for confounders, including hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study, higher NT-proBNP concentrations in early pregnancy were associated with a lower risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and hypertension 2 to 7 years post partum. These findings suggest that normal early-pregnancy cardiovascular physiology, as assessed by NT-proBNP concentration, may provide biologic insights into both pregnancy outcome and cardiovascular disease risk.

This Patient Page describes what it means to have coronary heart calcium, why a clinician may recommend testing for it, and the benefits and risks of knowing your coronary heart calcium score.

This Editorial compares the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations with the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC)/multisociety guidelines on statin usage in primary prevention.

Importance Current guidelines recommend a few different approaches to the use of coronary artery calcium (CAC) testing as a tool for risk assessment and decision-making regarding drug therapy for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Observations Coronary artery calcium testing is not recommended for universal screening, particularly in patients at very low or high predicted risk for ASCVD, where its yield and utility for altering clinical decisions are limited. Use of CAC testing appears to be optimal when used in selected patients who are at intermediate or borderline risk of ASCVD as a sequential decision aid after initial quantitative risk assessment and consideration of individual patient risk-enhancing factors (eg, strong family history of premature ASCVD, chronic kidney disease). Although convincing clinical trials have not been completed, observational studies strongly suggest that, in those at intermediate risk, CAC testing can meaningfully reclassify risk and can support improved targeting of drug therapy to patients most likely to benefit. Conclusions and Relevance This narrative review summarizes the evidence available about the appropriate role of CAC testing for ASCVD risk assessment. Coronary artery calcium testing should be used selectively in patients who are at intermediate risk of ASCVD, when there is persistent uncertainty after performing standard risk assessment using traditional risk factors in a risk score, and after consideration of additional individual risk-enhancing factors. In these situations, the result of the CAC test can be helpful to clarify whether the patient’s true risk is high enough to justify initiation of primary prevention medications, such as statins or aspirin.

IMPORTANCE: The 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol recommends the use of risk-enhancing factor assessment and the selective use of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring to guide the allocation of statin therapy among individuals with an intermediate risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between risk-enhancing factors and incident ASCVD by CAC burden among those at intermediate risk of ASCVD. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis is a multicenter population-based prospective cross-sectional study conducted in the US. Baseline data for the present study were collected between July 15, 2000, and July 14, 2002, and follow-up for incident ASCVD events was ascertained through August 20, 2015. Participants were aged 45 to 75 years with no clinical ASCVD or diabetes at baseline, were at intermediate risk of ASCVD (≥7.5% to

Importance Besides age, other discriminators of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk are needed in older adults. Objectives To examine the predictive ability of coronary artery calcium (CAC) score vs age for incident ASCVD and how risk prediction changes by adding CAC score and removing only age from prediction models. Design, Setting, and Participants We conducted an analysis of pooled US population-based studies, including the Framingham Heart Study, the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, and the Cardiovascular Health Study. Results were compared with 2 European cohorts, the Rotterdam Study and the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study. Participants underwent CAC scoring between 1998 and 2006 using cardiac computed tomography. The participants included adults older than 60 years without known ASCVD at baseline. Exposures Coronary artery calcium scores. Main Outcomes and Measures Incident ASCVD events including coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke. Results The study included 4778 participants from 3 US cohorts, with a mean age of 70.1 years; 2582 (54.0%) were women, and 2431 (50.9%) were nonwhite. Over 11 years of follow-up (44 152 person-years), 405 CHD and 228 stroke events occurred. Coronary artery calcium score (vs age) had a greater association with incident CHD (C statistic, 0.733 vs 0.690; C statistics difference, 0.043; 95% CI of difference, 0.009-0.075) and modestly improved prediction of incident stroke (C statistic, 0.695 vs 0.670; C statistics difference, 0.025; 95% CI of difference, −0.015 to 0.064). Adding CAC score to models including traditional cardiovascular risk factors, with only age being removed, provided improved discrimination for incident CHD (C statistic, 0.735 vs 0.703; C statistics difference, 0.032; 95% CI of difference, 0.002-0.062) but not for stroke. Coronary artery calcium score was more likely than age to provide higher category-free net reclassification improvement among participants who experienced an ASCVD event (0.390; 95% CI, 0.312-0.467 vs 0.08; 95% CI −0.001 to 0.181) and to result in more accurate reclassification of risk for ASCVD events among these individuals. The findings were similar in the 2 European cohorts (n = 4990). Conclusions and Relevance Coronary artery calcium may be an alternative marker besides age to better discriminate between lower and higher CHD risk in older adults. Whether CAC score can assist in guiding the decision to initiate statin treatment for primary prevention in older adults requires further investigation.

Importance The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines both recommend lipid-lowering treatment for primary prevention based on global risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for statin use have included participants with specific risk-factor profiles. Objective To evaluate the overlap between the ACC/AHA and ESC guideline recommendations and available evidence from RCTs for statin use in primary prevention of CVD. Design, Setting, and Participants We calculated the 10-year risk for hard atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) following the ACC/AHA guideline, 10-year risk of CVD mortality following the ESC guideline, and we determined eligibility for each of 10 major RCTs for primary prevention of CVD. Conducted from July 2014 to August 2015, this study included 7279 individuals free of CVD, aged 45 to 75 years, examined between 1997 and 2008 for the Rotterdam Study, a prospective population-based cohort. Main Outcomes and Measures Proportions of individuals qualifying for lipid-lowering treatment per guidelines, proportions of individuals eligible for any of the 10 RCTs, overlap between these groups, and corresponding ASCVD incidence rates. Results Of the 7279 individuals included in the study, 58.2% were women (n = 4238) and had a mean (SD) age of 61.1 (6.9) years. The ACC/AHA guidelines would recommend statin initiation in 4284 participants (58.9%), while the ESC guidelines would in 2399 participants (33.0%) (overlapping by 95.8% with ACC/AHA). A total of 3857 participants (53.0%) met eligibility criteria for at least 1 RCT. Recommendations from both guidelines and trial evidence overlapped for 1546 participants (21.2%), who were at high risk for ASCVD (21.5 per 1000 person-years). A further 1703 participants (23.4%) would be recommended for statins by the guidelines in the absence of direct trial evidence, while 1176 (16.2%) would have been eligible for at least 1 trial without being recommended statin treatment by any guideline. Finally, 1719 participants (23.6%) would not be recommended a statin, nor would qualify for any of the trials. These individuals had low incidence of ASCVD (3.3 per 1000 person-years). Conclusions and Relevance Based on this European population study, ACC/AHA and ESC prevention guidelines often did not align at the individual level. However, for one-fifth of the general population, guidelines on both sides of the Atlantic recommend statin initiation, with trial data supporting the efficacy. There should be no controversy about providing optimal preventive medication to these individuals.

Importance The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association hypertension guideline recommends lower blood pressure (BP) thresholds for initiating antihypertensive medication and treatment goals than the 2014 evidence-based hypertension guideline. Objective To estimate the potential association of the 2017 and 2014 hypertension guidelines with the proportion of US adults defined as being hypertensive or recommended for antihypertensive treatment and with risk reduction of major cardiovascular disease (CVD) and all-cause mortality. Design, Setting, and Participants Using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2013 to 2016, we estimated the proportions of US adults with hypertension or recommended for antihypertensive treatment according to the 2017 and 2014 hypertension guidelines. Using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, antihypertensive clinical trials, and population-based cohort studies, we estimated risk reductions of CVD and all-cause mortality assuming the entire US adult population achieved guideline-recommended systolic BP (SBP) treatment goals. Data were analyzed between October 2017 and March 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures Proportions and numbers of individuals with hypertension or recommended for antihypertensive treatment and numbers of CVD and all-cause mortality reduction. Results According to the 2017 hypertension guideline, the prevalence of hypertension (BP level ≥130/80 mm Hg) was 45.4% (95% CI, 43.9%-46.9%), representing 105.3 (95% CI, 101.9-108.8) million US adults, which was significantly higher than estimates per the 2014 hypertension guideline (BP level ≥140/90 mm Hg): 32.0% (95% CI, 30.3%-33.6%) or 74.1 (95% CI, 70.3-77.9) million individuals, respectively. Additionally, the proportion of individuals recommended for antihypertensive treatment was significantly higher according to the 2017 hypertension guideline (35.9%; 95% CI, 34.2%-37.5%) compared with the 2014 hypertension guideline (31.1%; 95% CI, 29.6%-32.7%). Achieving the 2017 hypertension guideline SBP treatment goals is estimated to reduce 610 000 (95% CI, 496 000-734 000) CVD events and 334 000 (95% CI, 245 000-434 000) total deaths in US adults 40 years and older. Corresponding estimates after achieving the 2014 hypertension guideline SBP treatment goals were 270 000 (95% CI, 202 000-349 000) and 177 000 (95% CI, 123 000-241 000), respectively. Implementing the 2017 hypertension guideline is estimated to increase 62 000 hypotension and 79 000 acute kidney injury or failure events. Conclusions and Relevance Compared with the 2014 hypertension guideline, the 2017 hypertension guideline was associated with an increase in the proportion of adults recommended for antihypertensive treatment and a further reduction in major CVD events and all-cause mortality, but a possible increase in the number of adverse events in the United States.

This community-based cohort study examines whether coronary artery calcium in adults aged 32 to 46 years is associated with incident clinical coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, and all-cause mortality during 12.5 years of follow-up.

Importance Data are sparse regarding which blood pressure (BP) components in young adulthood optimally determine cardiovascular disease (CVD) by middle age. Objectives To assess which BP components best determine incident CVD events in young adults and determine whether these associations vary by race and age at BP measurement. Design, Setting, and Participants Using data from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study, this study assessed the longitudinal race-stratified associations between BP and cardiovascular outcomes. CARDIA is a community-based cohort that recruited black and white individuals (age range, 18-30 years) from March 26, 1985, through June 7, 1986. CARDIA followed up participants for up to 28 years, and 94% of the surviving cohort completed at least 1 telephone interview or examination from August 2009 through August 2014. Exposures Blood pressures measubred at baseline (Y 0 ) and 15 years later (Y 15 ). Main Outcomes and Measures Composite CVD events, including coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, and other vascular diseases. Results A total of 4880 participants participated in the study (mean [SD] age, 24.9 [3.6] years at Y 0 and 25.0 [3.6] years at Y 15 ; 2223 male [45.6%] at Y 0 and 1800 [44.2%] at Y 15 ; 2657 female [54.4%] at Y 0 and 2277 [55.8%] at Y 0 ; 2473 black individuals [50.7%] at Y 0 and 1994 [48.9%] at Y 15 ; and 2407 white individuals [49.3%] at Y 0 and 2083 [51.1%] at Y 15 ). The mean SBP/DBP was 112/69 mm Hg in blacks and 109/68 mm Hg in whites at Y 0 and 117/77 mm Hg in blacks and 110/72 mm Hg in whites at Y 15 . During a 25-year follow-up from Y 0 , 210 CVD events occurred (twice as many events in blacks [n = 140] compared with whites), of which 131 (87 in blacks) occurred after Y 15 . With adjustments for covariates, results from Cox proportional hazards models, including SBP and DBP, jointly suggested that, at Y 0 , SBP (hazard ratio [HR] per 1-SD increase, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.09-1.61) but not DBP (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.88-1.26) was associated with CVD risk in blacks, whereas DBP (HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.21-2.50) but not SBP (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.57-1.18) was associated with CVD risk in whites. At Y 15, SBP was the strongest indicator of CVD in blacks (HR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.25-2.16) and whites (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.02-2.69). Conclusions and Relevance This study questions the classic view that DBP is more able to identify future CVD events than SBP in all individuals younger than 50 years. In young adulthood, SBP in black individuals and DBP in white individuals were the most robust indicators of future CVD. In middle-age, SBP in both races identified risk of incident CVD.