Why the study?
Does the coronary artery calcium score (CACS) predict mid- to long-term cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in patients with suspected CAD undergoing CCTA?
Does the coronary artery calcium score (CACS) predict mid- to long-term cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in patients with suspected CAD undergoing CCTA?
An elevated coronary artery calcium score (≥100) measured via CCTA is a strong independent predictor of mid- to long-term cardiovascular events in patients with suspected CAD.
CACS ≥100 may refine mid-term risk stratification in suspected CAD; leaves open whether it should guide therapy.
BACKGROUND: Although the coronary artery calcium score (CACS) is a prognostic measurement in asymptomatic individuals, it is measured in symptomatic patients using coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). We aimed to examine the predictive value of the CACS for mid- to long-term cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in patients who underwent CCTA. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 736 patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent CCTA. During a median follow-up period of 6.5 years, there were 39 primary outcomes (composite of cardiovascular disease death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke). The estimated 10-year cumulative rates of the primary outcome were significantly increased across CACS classes (3.9%, 9.2%, 11.8%, and 18.2% in CACS of 0, 1-99, 100-399, and ≥400, respectively, P<0.001). These rates of cardiovascular disease death and stroke were also significantly increased across CACS classes. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis showed that a CACS ≥100 was independently predictive for the primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 2.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.40-6.00, P=0.003), as well as the presence of ≥50% stenosis on CCTA (HR 2.27, 95% CI 1.13-4.46, P=0.022). CONCLUSIONS: An elevated CACS with the use of CCTA is an independent predictor of mid- to long-term cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in patients suspected of having CAD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yamamoto et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: