Key result
Cases of sudden cardiac death with plaque erosion had significantly less coronary calcification (P=0.003) and lower Framingham risk scores (P=0.001) than those with stable or ruptured plaques.
Why the study?
How do the Framingham risk index and coronary calcification compare in identifying risk for sudden cardiac death across different culprit plaque morphologies?
Population
79 consecutive adults with sudden cardiac death
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
May underestimate SCD risk in plaque erosion; leaves open morphology-specific risk models.
Observational (n=79)
How do the Framingham risk index and coronary calcification compare in identifying risk for sudden cardiac death across different culprit plaque morphologies?
Effect estimate: r=0.35
p-value: p=0.002
Relying solely on either the Framingham risk index or coronary calcification may misclassify sudden cardiac death risk, particularly in patients with plaque erosion, suggesting a complementary approach is needed.
Taylor et al. (2000) conducted an observational in Sudden cardiac death (n=79). Framingham risk index vs. Histologic coronary calcification was evaluated on Relationship between the Framingham risk index and the extent of histologic coronary calcification (r=0.35, p=0.002). Cases of sudden cardiac death with plaque erosion had significantly less coronary calcification (P=0.003) and lower Framingham risk scores (P=0.001) than those with stable or ruptured plaques.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: