4.7 Article

Coronary Calcium Scoring Improves Risk Prediction in Patients With Suspected Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 80, Issue 21, Pages 1965-1977

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2022.08.805

Keywords

coronary artery calcium score; coronary artery disease; coronary stenosis; pretest probability; risk factor

Funding

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [R0 1HL 098237, R0 1HL09 8236, R0 1 HL098 305, R0 1 HL 098235]
  2. Novo Nordisk Foundation [NNF21OC00669 81]
  3. Acarix

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The risk factor-weighted clinical likelihood (RF-CL) model and the coronary artery calcium score-weighted clinical likelihood (CACS-CL) model improve the identification of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) compared with basic pretest probability (PTP) models. These new models provide improved risk stratification for myocardial infarction and death.
BACKGROUND In patients with suspected obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), the risk factor-weighted clinical likelihood (RF-CL) model and the coronary artery calcium score-weighted clinical likelihood (CACS-CL) model improves the identification of obstructive CAD compared with basic pretest probability (PTP) models.OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of the new models.METHODS The incidences of myocardial infarction and death were stratified according to categories by the RF-CL and CACS-CL and compared with categories by the PTP model. We used cohorts from a Danish register (n = 41,177) and a North American randomized study (n = 3,952). All patients were symptomatic and were referred for diagnostic testing because of clinical indications.RESULTS Despite substantial down-reclassification of patients to a likelihood #5% of CAD with either the RF-CL (45%) or CACS-CL (60%) models compared with the PTP (18%), the annualized event rates of myocardial infarction and death were low using all 3 models; RF-CL 0.51% (95% CI: 0.46-0.56), CACS-CL 0.48% (95% CI: 0.44-0.56), and PTP 0.37% (95% CI: 0.31-0.44), respectively. Overall, comparison of the predictive power of the 3 models using Harrell's C-statistics demonstrated superiority of the RF-CL (0.64 [95% CI: 0.63-0.65]) and CACS-CL (0.69 [95% CI: 0.67-0.70]) compared with the PTP model (0.61 [95% CI: 0.60-0.62]).CONCLUSIONS The simple clinical likelihood models that include classical risk factors or risk factors combined with CACS provide improved risk stratification for myocardial infarction and death compared with the standard PTP model. Hence, the optimized RF-CL and CACS-CL models identify 2.5 and 3.3 times more patients, respectively, who may not benefit from further diagnostic testing. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2022;80:1965-1977)(c) 2022 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available