Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This observational study finds an association between coronary artery calcium score and benign pancreaticobiliary disorders, suggesting a potential link beyond metabolic syndrome.
Background: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) score is a predictor of ischemic heart disease and closely linked to metabolic syndrome (MS). This study investigates the relationship between CAC and benign hepato-pancreaticobiliary disorders. Methods: A retrospective, cross-sectional, observational study was conducted on individuals who underwent cardiac computed tomography scans between 2015 and 2022 at a tertiary medical center. Multivariate logistic regression explored the association between CAC and potential confounders. Additionally, a logistic regression model was applied to determine whether CAC independently predicts benign hepato-pancreaticobiliary disorders [steatotic liver disease (SLD), fatty pancreas, gallstones, choledocholithiasis, pancreatic calcifications, and pancreatic duct stones]. Results: Among 2422 individuals, 725 met inclusion. Univariate regression analysis indicated CAC was significantly linked to SLD, older age, male sex, and MS. Both SLD and fatty pancreas showed an association with CAC in individuals with and without MS ( P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that CAC was independently associated with increasing age [OR: 1.18 (95% CI: 1.15–1.62), P < 0.001], male sex [OR: 3.12 (95% CI: 2.52–4.26), P < 0.001], MS [OR: 1.29 (95% CI: 1.25–2.45), P < 0.001], SLD [OR: 1.26 (95% CI: 1.12–2.42), P < 0.001], fatty pancreas [OR: 1.79 (95% CI: 1.19–1.98), P < 0.001], gallstones [OR: 1.82 (95% CI: 1.64–2.05), P < 0.001], choledocholithiasis [OR: 1.21 (95% CI: 1.19–2.62), P < 0.001], and pancreatic calcifications [OR: 1.74 (95% CI: 1.12–2.32), P < 0.001], regardless of MS. Conclusions: The CAC score is correlated with an increased prevalence of SLD, fatty pancreas, and other benign pancreaticobiliary conditions, independent of MS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Benson et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: