Readily available office-based clinical markers can supplement traditional population-based models to improve cardiovascular risk stratification in asymptomatic patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May supplement office-based risk stratification; leaves open prospective validation of incremental benefit over standard models.
Current tools for predicting coronary heart disease risk in the asymptomatic patient fall into 2 major categories: traditional population-based models and noninvasive imaging techniques. Population-based models that estimate cardiovascular risk are powerful clinical tools but do not utilize a large volume of patient-specific data that are readily available to the clinician and may help to identify at-risk patients. The use of high-technology noninvasive imaging has not been consistently validated and clinicians or patients often lack the resources for such testing. This paper reviews several commonly encountered historical, physical, radiologic, laboratory, and electrocardiographic markers of increased cardiovascular risk that may enhance clinicians' ability to identify individual patients at increased risk for coronary heart disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
DeFilippis et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: