4.6 Article

Coronary Artery Disease in French Canadians-Investigation of a Suggested Vulnerable Population

期刊

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 10, 页码 1240-1245

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2015.11.006

关键词

-

资金

  1. GE Healthcare
  2. TeraRecon

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: There is a perception among Canadian physicians that coronary artery disease ( CAD) and adverse cardiac events are more common in those of French Canadian heritage. We sought to compare the prevalence of CAD using coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) in French Canadians and non-French white Canadians. Methods: Consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled in our institutional CCTA registry. Of 10,868 CCTA examinations, we analyzed white patients who identified themselves as French Canadian or non-French Canadian. These 2 groups were compared for baseline characteristics, cardiovascular risk factors, and routine markers for CAD on CTCA. Propensity score adjustments were also made to account for differences in demographics. Results: We identified 1683 French Canadians (mean age, 58.5 +/- 10.7 years; 54.2% men) and 5077 non-French white Canadians (mean age, 59.4 +/- 11.4 years; 57.3% men). French Canadians were more likely to have a smoking history (64.1% vs 56.1%), diabetes (15.6% vs 13.6%), and a family history of premature CAD (53.3% vs 44.6%) (P < 0.05 for all). There was no significant difference in measures of CAD between French Canadians and non-French white Canadians in obstructive CAD (32.5% vs 32.2%; P = 0.997), total plaque score (4.6 +/- 4.3 vs 4.5 +/- 4.4; P = 0.616) and Agatston score (168.1 +/- 319.8 vs 183.6 +/- 433.7; P = 0.371). After propensity score adjustment, there was still no significant difference between the groups. Conclusions: Our study suggests that French Canadians in the Champlain region have a greater prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors compared with non-French Canadians; however, they do not appear to have a greater prevalence or severity of coronary atherosclerosis as assessed by CCTA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据