SAT-613 Comparison of CV Risk Scores to Evaluate Cardiovascular Risks in Thai Type 2 Diabetes

Objective: Various cardiovascular risk scores have been developed and the RAMA-EGAT risk score was developed by Thai database with minority of diabetes. This study aims to compare the predictability of the ADVANCE, UKPDS, SCORE, Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and RAMA-EGAT risk score for carotid atherosclerosis, arterial stiffness and peripheral arterial disease in Thai T2DM patients. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in T2DM patients without established CVD at a tertiary care hospital. Demographic and DM-specific data were collected. Carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT), carotid plaque, cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI) and ankle-brachial index (ABI) were measured as the markers of atherosclerosis. Risks of CVD were calculated according to the ADVANCE, UKPDS, SCORE, FRS and RAMA-EGAT risk scores. These risk scores were correlated with the atherosclerotic markers by odds ratio using logistic regression and the proper points of the risk scores to predict atherosclerosis were calculated by the areas under the curve (AUC). Results: There were 180 T2DM participants with the mean age of 60-year-old, diabetes duration of 13 years and mean A1C 7.4%. The highest sensitive risk score was FRS, following by UKPDS, SCORE, ADVANCE and RAMA-EGAT risk score, which indicated high-risk patients as 44.8%, 27.6%, 18.9%, 13.8% and 0% accordingly. There were 40.3% of the patients with arterial stiffness detected by CAVI > 9, 24.0% with carotid atherosclerosis defined by CIMT > 0.07 mm or presenting of carotid plague and 8.3% with ABI < 0.9. The odds ratios (OR) of 4 risk scores increased by the quartiles for carotid plaque, CIMT, CAVI and ABI while the OR of RAMA-EGAT scores increased by the quartiles only for carotid plaque. The highest quartile of ADVANCE, UKPDS, SCORE and FRS significantly (P 11% in 10-year, fatal-SCORE > 6% in 10-year and FRS > 18% in 10-year were predictive of carotid atherosclerosis with sensitivity of 76-84% and specificity of 61-69% and they were predictive of arterial stiffness with the sensitivity of 71-80% and specificity of 64-68%. Conclusion: There was no significant difference when comparing the predictability of the ADVANCE