Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- atherosclerosis (2)
- cardiac events (1)
- coronary calcium (1)
- coronary computed-tomography angiography (CCTA) (1)
- coronary disease (1)
- coronary plaques (1)
- disease progression (1)
- risk assessment (1)
- tomography (1)
- vascular calcification (1)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) was the only method to image coronary arteries for a long time and is still the gold-standard. Technology of noninvasive imaging by coronary computed-tomography angiography (CCTA) has experienced remarkable progress during the last two decades. It is possible to visualize atherosclerotic lesions in the vessel wall in contrast to "lumenography" performed by ICA. Coronary artery disease can be ruled out by CCTA with excellent accuracy. The degree of stenoses is, however, often overestimated which impairs specificity. Atherosclerotic lesions can be characterized as calcified, non-calcified and partially calcified. Calcified plaques are usually quantified using the Agatston-Score. Higher scores are correlated with worse cardiovascular outcome and increased risk of cardiac events. For non-calcified or partially calcified plaques different angiographic findings like positive remodelling, a large necrotic core or spotty calcification more frequently lead to myocardial infarctions. CCTA is an important tool with increasing clinical value for ruling out coronary artery disease or relevant stenoses as well as for advanced risk stratification.
Background: Computed tomography (CT) allows estimation of coronary artery calcium (CAC) progression. We evaluated several progression algorithms in our unselected, population-based cohort for risk prediction of coronary and cardiovascular events.
Methods: In 3281 participants (45–74 years of age), free from cardiovascular disease until the second visit, risk factors, and CTs at baseline (b) and after a mean of 5.1 years (5y) were measured. Hard coronary and cardiovascular events, and total cardiovascular events including revascularization, as well, were recorded during a follow-up time of 7.8±2.2 years after the second CT. The added predictive value of 10 CAC progression algorithms on top of risk factors including baseline CAC was evaluated by using survival analysis, C-statistics, net reclassification improvement, and integrated discrimination index. A subgroup analysis of risk in CAC categories was performed.
Results: We observed 85 (2.6%) hard coronary, 161 (4.9%) hard cardiovascular, and 241 (7.3%) total cardiovascular events. Absolute CAC progression was higher with versus without subsequent coronary events (median, 115 [Q1–Q3, 23–360] versus 8 [0–83], P<0.0001; similar for hard/total cardiovascular events). Some progression algorithms added to the predictive value of baseline CT and risk assessment in terms of C-statistic or integrated discrimination index, especially for total cardiovascular events. However, CAC progression did not improve models including CAC5y and 5-year risk factors. An excellent prognosis was found for 921 participants with double-zero CACb=CAC5y=0 (10-year coronary and hard/total cardiovascular risk: 1.4%, 2.0%, and 2.8%), which was for participants with incident CAC 1.8%, 3.8%, and 6.6%, respectively. When CACb progressed from 1 to 399 to CAC5y≥400, coronary and total cardiovascular risk were nearly 2-fold in comparison with subjects who remained below CAC5y=400. Participants with CACb≥400 had high rates of hard coronary and hard/total cardiovascular events (10-year risk: 12.0%, 13.5%, and 30.9%, respectively).
Conclusions: CAC progression is associated with coronary and cardiovascular event rates, but adds only weakly to risk prediction. What counts is the most recent CAC value and risk factor assessment. Therefore, a repeat scan >5 years after the first scan may be of additional value, except when a double-zero CT scan is present or when the subjects are already at high risk.