Why the study?
Does coronary artery calcium scoring combined with pretest clinical risk assessment reduce unnecessary cardiac investigations in patients presenting with chest pain?
Does coronary artery calcium scoring combined with pretest clinical risk assessment reduce unnecessary cardiac investigations in patients presenting with chest pain?
Using calcium scoring and pretest risk assessment in rural chest pain patients reduces unnecessary cardiac investigations but yields a high rate of incidental CT findings.
May support selective discharge after zero calcium scoring; leaves open net benefit of routine chest CT given frequent incidental findings.
462 patients presenting with chest pain to a rural district general hospital underwent calcium scoring and pretest clinical risk assessment in order to stratify subsequent investigations and treatment was retrospectively reviewed. The patients were followed up for two years and further investigations and outcomes recorded. Of the 206 patients with zero calcium score, 132 patients were immediately discharged from cardiac follow-up with no further investigation on the basis of their calcium score, low pretest risk of coronary artery disease, and no significant incidental findings. After further tests, 267 patients were discharged with no further cardiac therapy, 88 patients were discharged with additional medical therapy, and 19 patients underwent coronary artery by-pass grafting or percutaneous intervention. 164 patients with incidental findings on the chest CT (computed tomography) accompanying calcium scoring were reviewed, of which 88 patients underwent further tests and follow-up for noncardiac causes of chest pain. The correlations between all major risk factors and calcium scores were weak except for a combination of diabetes and hypertension in the male gender (P = 0.012), The use of calcium scoring and pretest risk appeared to reduce the number of unnecessary cardiac investigations in our patients: however, the calcium scoring test produced a high number of incidental findings on the associated CT scans.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sekar et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: