Search

Background: Globorisk is one of the prediction tools for 10-year risk assessment of cardiovascular disease, featuring an office-based (non-laboratory-based) version. This version does not require laboratory tests for determining the CVD risk. The present study aims to determine the 10-year CVD risk using the office-based Globorisk model and factors associated with the 10-year CVD risk. Methods: In this study, baseline data from 6810 individuals participating in the Fasa cohort study, with no history of CVD or stroke, were utilized. The risk equation of the office-based Globorisk model incorporates age, sex, systolic blood pressure (SBP), body mass index (BMI), and smoking status. The Globorisk model categorizes the risk into three groups: low risk (< 10%), moderate risk (10% to < 20%), and high risk (≥ 20%). To identify factors associated with the 10-year CVD risk, the predicted risk was categorized into two groups: <10% and ≥ 10%. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was employed to determine factors associated with an increased CVD risk. Results: According to the 10-year CVD risk categorization, 78.3%, 16.4%, and 5.3% of men were in the low, moderate, and high risk groups, respectively, while 85.8%, 10.0%, and 4.2%, of women were in the respective risk groups. Multivariable logistic regression results indicated that in men, the 10-year CVD risk decreases with being an opium user, and increases with being illiterate, having abdominal obesity, and low or moderate physical activity compared to high physical activity. In women, being married, and higher fiber consumption decrease the 10-year CVD risk, while being illiterate, low or moderate physical activity compared to high physical activity, having abdominal obesity, opium use, and being in wealth quintiles 1 to 4 compared to quintile 5 increase the risk. Conclusions: Considering the factors associated with increased CVD risk, there is a need to enhance awareness and modify lifestyle to mitigate and reduce the risk of CVD. Additionally, early identification of individuals at moderate to high risk is essential for preventing disease progression. The use of the office-based Globorisk model can be beneficial in settings where resources are limited for determining the 10-year CVD risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Acute myocardial infarction is still a leading cause of death worldwide, accounting for roughly three million deaths yearly. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and factors associated with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Non-ST Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Iran. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted using the databases of the Fasa Registry on Acute Myocardial Infarction (FaRMI) and the Fasa Adult Cohort Study (FACS). chi-squared and one-way ANOVA tests were utilized to calculate the unadjusted associations between the study variables. A multivariate multinomial logistic regression model was also employed to determine the adjusted association of each independent variable with the risk of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Results: The prevalence of STEMI and non-STEMI was 31.60% and 11.80%, respectively. Multinomial logistic regression showed that older age, anemia, high WBC, and high creatinine levels were associated with higher odds of STEMI and non-STEMI compared to healthy individuals. In addition, based on the analysis being a woman(OR = 0.63,95%CI:0.51-0.78), anemia(OR = 0.67,95%CI:0.54-0.63)and hypertension (OR = 0.80,95%CI:0.65-0.97)decreased the likelihood of STEMI occurrence compared to non-STEMI, while high WBC(OR = 1.19,95%CI:1.15-1.23)increased the odds. Conclusion: In this study, significant predictors of MI risk included age, gender, anemia, lipid profile, inflammation, and renal function. Subsequent investigations ought to prioritize the comprehensive understanding of the underlying mechanisms that drive these connections and assess the effectiveness of specific interventions aimed at diminishing the occurrence of MI and improving patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The WHO model has laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based versions for 10-year risk prediction of cardiovascular diseases. Due to the fact that in some settings, there may not be the necessary facilities for risk assessment with a laboratory-based model, the present study aimed to determine the agreement between laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based WHO cardiovascular risk equations. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we used the baseline data of 6796 individuals without a history of cardiovascular disease and stroke who participated in the Fasa cohort study. The risk factors of the laboratory-based model included age, sex, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diabetes, smoking and total cholesterol, while the non-laboratory-based model included age, sex, SBP, smoking and BMI. Kappa coefficients was used to determine the agreement between the grouped risk and Bland–Altman plots were used to determine the agreement between the scores of the two models. Sensitivity and specificity of non-laboratory-based model were measured at the high-risk threshold. Results: In the whole population, the agreement between the grouped risk of the two models was substantial (percent agreement = 79.0%, kappa = 0.68). The agreement was better in males than in females. A substantial agreement was observed in all males (percent agreement = 79.8%, kappa = 0.70) and males < 60 years old (percent agreement = 79.9%, kappa = 0.67). The agreement in males ≥ 60 years old was moderate (percent agreement = 79.7%, kappa = 0.59). The agreement among females was also substantial (percent agreement = 78.3%, kappa = 0.66). The agreement for females < 60 years old, (percent agreement = 78.8%, kappa = 0.61) was substantial and for females ≥ 60 years old, (percent agreement = 75.8%, kappa = 0.46) was moderate. According to Bland–Altman plots, the limit of agreement was (95%CI: -4.2% to 4.3%) for males and (95%CI: -4.1% to 4.6%) for females. The range of agreement was suitable for both males < 60 years (95%CI: -3.8% to 4.0%) and females < 60 years (95%CI: -3.6% to 3.9%). However, it was not suitable for males ≥ 60 years (95% CI: -5.8% to 5.5%) and females ≥ 60 years (95%CI: -5.7% to 7.4%). At the high-risk threshold of 20% in non-laboratory and laboratory-based models, the sensitivity of the non-laboratory-based model was 25.7%, 70.7%, 35.7%, and 35.4% for males < 60 years, males ≥ 60 years, females < 60 years, and females ≥ 60 years, respectively. At the high-risk threshold of 10% in non-laboratory-based and 20% in laboratory-based models, the non-laboratory model has high sensitivity of 100% for males ≥ 60 years, females < 60 years, females ≥ 60 years, and 91.4% for males < 60 years. Conclusion: A good agreement was observed between laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based versions of the WHO risk model. Also, at the risk threshold of 10% to detect high-risk individuals, the non-laboratory-based model has acceptable sensitivity for practical risk assessment and the screening programs in settings where resources are limited and people do not have access to laboratory tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]