Observational studyBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
A cross-sectional study: carotid artery stiffness in individuals with varying cardiovascular disease risk using shear wave elasticity.
Observational study in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAnalyzing the correlation between carotid stiffness and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk, and determine elastic modulus (EM) threshold.
methodsIn this single-center, cross-sectional retrospective observational study, 229 patients without carotid plaque were consecutively enrolled between July 2021 and August 2022. ASCVD risk was calculated by simpler Framingham model and categorized into low (N = 108), moderate (N = 58) and high risk groups (N = 63). Shear-wave elastography was used to quantify carotid stiffness, and the resulting values were analyzed for their association with ASCVD risk.
resultsAmong 229 participants without carotid plaque, 108 (47.2%), 58 (25.3%), and 63 (27.5%) were categorized as low, moderate, and high ASCVD risk, respectively. Carotid stiffness parameters (Emean and Emax) were significantly lower in the low-risk group compared with moderate- and high-risk groups (p < 0.05), with no significant differences between the latter two groups. Multivariable linear regression revealed that each one-level increase in ASCVD risk category was independently associated with increased Emean (β = 0.933 kPa, p < 0.001), Emax (β = 1.222 kPa, p = 0.005), and Emin (β = 0.564 kPa, p = 0.011). All three stiffness parameters independently predicted cardiovascular events: Emean (OR = 1.105, 95%CI:1.009–1.211), Emax (OR = 1.067, 95%CI:1.002–1.136), and Emin (OR = 1.129, 95%CI:1.005–1.267). For CVD detection, Emean demonstrated optimal specificity (0.795) at a cutoff of 8.177 kPa (AUC = 0.629), whereas ASCVD risk category alone achieved an AUC of 0.644 (sensitivity 0.717, specificity 0.528). Combined models improved specificity but reduced sensitivity without significantly enhancing AUC values.
conclusionEM was associated with ASCVD risk in this exploratory cohort; whether it can reliably distinguish risk categories awaits prospective validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.