Table 3.
Results of adjustment randomized comparisons.
| Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|
| Mean intima-media thickness | ||
| Model 1 | 2.29 (1.17–4.47) | 0.015 |
| Model 2 | 2.27 (1.16–4.44) | 0.016 |
| Model 3 | 2.48 (1.24–4.93) | 0.010 |
| Model 4 | 2.60 (1.29–5.28) | 0.008 |
| Model 5 | 2.89 (1.34–6.24) | 0.007 |
| Right maximum intima-media thickness | ||
| Model 1 | 1.77 (1.00–3.13) | 0.049 |
| Model 2 | 1.78 (1.00–3.14) | 0.049 |
| Model 3 | 1.87 (1.04–3.34) | 0.036 |
| Model 4 | 1.88 (1.05–3.40) | 0.035 |
| Model 5 | 2.15 (1.12–4.14) | 0.022 |
| Left maximum intima-media thickness | ||
| Model 1 | 2.22 (1.25–3.92) | 0.006 |
| Model 2 | 2.24 (1.26–3.98) | 0.006 |
| Model 3 | 2.33 (1.28–4.22) | 0.006 |
| Model 4 | 2.43 (1.32–4.48) | 0.004 |
| Model 5 | 2.46 (1.28–4.73) | 0.007 |
Multiple logistic regression analysis included the treatment group, age, gender, and baseline IMT (model 1); model 1 plus body mass index and current smoking (model 2); model 2 plus HbA1c, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglyceride, and systolic blood pressure (model 3); model 3 plus eGFR, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme/angiotensin II receptor blocker, use of statin, and use of antiplatelets (model 4); model 4 plus the use of oral hypoglycemic agents (model 5).