Key result
Traditional risk charts remain primary, though intermediate-risk patients may benefit from added imaging and serological markers.
Why the study?
Intermediate-risk patients undergoing cardiovascular risk stratification may require additional tools beyond traditional risk factor charts, such as serological markers and imaging.
Do serological markers and imaging improve cardiovascular risk stratification compared to traditional risk factors in intermediate-risk patients?
Do serological markers and imaging improve cardiovascular risk stratification compared to traditional risk factors in intermediate-risk patients?
Serological markers and imaging may serve as valuable adjunctive tools for refining cardiovascular risk stratification in patients at intermediate risk based on traditional factors.
Cardiovascular diseases continue to be the primary cause of death worldwide, thus making their high burden a call for adequate prevention strategies. Estimating individual risk of suffering cardiac or cerebral vascular events allows the implementation of disease-modifying measures.Risk stratification charts based on traditional risk factors (sex, age, smoking, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes mellitus and hypertension) are the most recommended methods, given their easy use, high applicability and predictive value. Nevertheless, intermediate risk patients undergoing further stratification may require additional tools, such as serological markers and imaging. This review focuses on the utility and applicability of various tools designed for cardiovascular risk assessment
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
F et al. (2019) conducted a review in Cardiovascular Disease. Serological markers and cardiovascular imaging was evaluated. Cardiovascular risk stratification charts remain the primary recommended method for risk estimation, though intermediate-risk patients may benefit from additional testing with serological markers and imaging.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: