心血管疾病危险人群风险预测分级与心血管疾病的相关性研究

Relationship between different cardiovascular disease risk assessment systems and cardiac vascular disease in cardiovascular disease risk population

目的:探讨不同心血管疾病风险预测分级方式与心血管疾病(CVD)的相关性。方法:选取体检中心体检者267例为研究对象,收集基线资料,采用Framingham风险积分系统、ICVD简易评估工具及China-PAR模型分别评估研究对象的CVD发生风险,以χ^(2)检验比较各组的评估结果。结果:①三种评价方法预测结果比较,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=10.076,P=0.007)。China-PAR模型和ICVD简易评估工具预测低危险度比例高于Framingham风险积分系统(χ^(2)=13.749、21.355,P=0.000、0.000),预测高危险度比例低于Framingham风险积分系统(χ^(2)=5.723、19.063,P=0.023、0.000),ICVD简易评估工具预测高危险度比例高于China-PAR模型(χ^(2)=4.407,P=0.044);②三种评价方法预测35~59岁人群10年CVD发生风险结果比较,差异无统计学意义(χ^(2)=0.075,P=0.963)。三种评价方法预测≥60岁人群10年CVD发生风险结果比较,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=50.810,P=0.000)。Framingham风险积分系统和China-PAR模型预测低危险度比例低于ICVD简易评估工具(χ^(2)=16.932、21.291,P=0.000、0.000),预测高危险度比例高于ICVD简易评估工具(χ^(2)=20.314、24.217,P=0.000、0.000),而Framingham风险积分系统和China-PAR模型比较,差异无统计学意义(χ^(2)=0.289、0.195,P=0.345、0.362)。结论:Framingham风险积分系统、ICVD简易评估工具及China-PAR模型在预测10年CVD发生风险存在明显差异,在60岁以上人群中,Framingham风险积分系统和China-PAR模型预测低危险度比例低于ICVD简易评估工具,预测高危险度比例高于ICVD简易评估工具。

Objective To explore the relationship between different cardiovascular disease risk assessment systems and cardiac vascular disease(CVD).Method The 267 healthy controls were selected as research objects,and the baseline data were collected,the Framingham risk score,ischemic cerebral vascular disease(ICVD)risk assessment model and Chinese Adult Dyslipidemia Prevention Guideline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease(ASCVD)risk algorithm were used to calculate the risk of CVD,and the result were compared among different methods byχ^(2) test.Results①The differences were statistically significant on evaluated result among three methods(χ^(2)=10.076,P=0.007).Ratio of low risk were higher(χ^(2)=13.749,21.355,P=0.000,0.000)and ratio of high risk were lower(χ^(2)=5.723,19.063,P=0.023,0.000)in China-PAR model and ICVD risk assessment model than in Framingham risk score,and ratio of high risk were higher in ICVD risk assessment model than in China-PAR model(χ^(2)=4.407,P=0.044);②There were no differences on the difference of 10-year risk of CVD among 35~59 ages people(χ^(2)=0.075,P=0.963).The differences were statistically significant on the difference of 10-year risk of CVD among≥60 ages people by three methods(χ^(2)=50.810,P=0.000).Ratio of low risk were lower(χ^(2)=16.932,21.291,P=0.000,0.000)and ratio of high risk were higher(χ^(2)=20.314,24.217,P=0.000,0.000)in Framingham risk score and China-PAR model than those in ICVD risk assessment model,and there were no differences between Framingham risk score and China-PAR model(χ^(2)=0.289,0.195,P=0.345,0.362).Conclusion There are significant differences on the difference of 10-year risk of CVD in the Framingham risk score,ICVD risk assessment model and China-PAR model,among people over 60 ages,ratio of low risk were lower and ratio of high risk were higher in Framingham risk score and China-PAR model than those in ICVD risk assessment model.