Coronary Inflammation in Patients With and Without Standard Modifiable Cardiovascular Risk Factors: Insights From a Novel Computed Tomography Imaging Biomarker Pericoronary Adipose Tissue Attenuation

Background

Significant progress has been made in coronary artery disease (CAD) prevention by targeting standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRFs), which include hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, and smoking. However, there is growing incidence of CAD occurring in the absence of SMuRFs, a phenomenon now termed “SMuRF-less” CAD. Identifying novel biomarkers and mechanisms for SMuRF-less CAD is crucial for new therapeutic strategies in this under-recognised group. The role of inflammation in CAD has been extensively studied and was recently validated as a therapeutic target.

Aims

This study aimed to assess coronary inflammation in patients without SMuRFs and patients with SMuRFs using pericoronary adipose tissue (PCAT) attenuation, a novel and specific biomarker of coronary inflammation quantified on computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA). Our secondary aim was to compare the coronary plaque burden and coronary artery stenosis severity between the groups.

Method

We conducted a retrospective single-centre study of 309 consecutive patients who underwent clinically indicated serial CTCAs for suspected stable CAD (2010–2016) at Monash Health, Melbourne, Australia. Patients with a history of CAD were excluded. PCAT_RCA attenuation measurement around the proximal right coronary artery (RCA) was performed using semiautomated software. Plaque burden was assessed using the segment involvement score (SIS) and segment stenosis score (SSS). Coronary artery diameter stenosis severity was assessed using the Coronary Artery Disease - Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) classification.

Results

In the final study population of 309 patients (median age 57.5 years; 51.8% female), 83 (26.9%) patients were SMuRF-less. Baseline characteristics were similar between patients without SMuRFs and those with SMuRFs, and patients with SMuRFs were more frequently on statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, and aspirin. Patients without SMuRFs had a similar PCAT_RCA mean attenuation (Hounsfield units, HU) compared with patients with SMuRFs (−77.5±9.5 vs −78.4±8.9 HU; p=0.481), despite having a lower coronary plaque burden and stenosis severity. The mean SIS and SSS were 18.7% and 39.5% lower, respectively, in patients without SMuRFs than in those with SMuRFs (SIS: 1.78±2.19 vs 2.72±2.88, p=0.01; SSS: 2.22±3.36 vs 3.67±4.38; p=0.004). Patients with SMuRFs were more likely to have obstructive CAD than patients without SMuRFs (odds ratio 2.8; 95% confidence interval 1.3–5.7; p=0.006).

Conclusions

In patients undergoing clinically indicated CTCA, patients without SMuRFs exhibited a similar degree of coronary inflammation to those with SMuRFs, despite having a lower plaque burden and stenosis severity. These findings may provide early mechanistic insights into why patients without SMuRFs still develop CAD and subsequent cardiovascular events. Further research is needed to validate these findings. If confirmed, the therapeutic target of inflammation could be explored further in patients without SMuRFs.