Iksung Cho1, Bríain Ó Hartaigh2, Heidi Gransar3, Valentina Valenti4, Fay Y Lin5, Stephan Achenbach6, Daniel S Berman3, Matthew J Budoff7, Tracy Q Callister8, Mouaz H Al-Mallah9, Filippo Cademartiri10, Kavitha Chinnaiyan11, Benjamin J W Chow12, Allison M Dunning13, Augustin DeLago14, Todd C Villines15, Martin Hadamitzky16, Joerg Hausleiter17, Jonathon Leipsic18, Leslee J Shaw19, Philipp A Kaufmann20, Ricardo C Cury21, Gudrun Feuchtner22, Yong-Jin Kim23, Erica Maffei10, Gilbert Raff11, Gianluca Pontone24, Daniele Andreini24, Hyuk-Jae Chang25, James K Min26. 1. Department of Radiology, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and the Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Division of Cardiology, Severance Cardiovascular Hospital and Severance Biomedical Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul, South Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and the Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Geriatrics, Yale School of Medicine, Adler Geriatric Center, New Haven, USA. 3. Department of Imaging, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and the Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. 5. Department of Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. 6. Department of Medicine, University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany. 7. Department of Medicine, Harbor UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 8. Tennessee Heart and Vascular Institute, Hendersonville, TN, USA. 9. Department of Medicine, Wayne State University, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA. 10. Cardiovascular Imaging Unit, Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Monastier, Treviso, Italy and Department of Radiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 11. William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oaks, MI, USA. 12. Department of Medicine and Radiology, University of Ottawa, ON, Canada. 13. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA. 14. Capitol Cardiology Associates, Albany, NY, USA. 15. Department of Medicine, Walter Reed Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA. 16. Division of Cardiology, Deutsches Herzzentrum Munchen, Munich, Germany. 17. Medizinische Klinik I der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany. 18. Department of Medicine and Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 19. Division of Cardiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. 20. University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland. 21. Baptist Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, FL, USA. 22. Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. 23. Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea. 24. Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Milan, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS Milan, Italy. 25. Division of Cardiology, Severance Cardiovascular Hospital and Severance Biomedical Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul, South Korea. 26. Department of Radiology, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and the Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: jkm2001@med.cornell.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring is a predictor of future adverse clinical events, and a surrogate measure of overall coronary artery plaque burden. Coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) is a contrast-enhanced method that allows for visualization of plaque as well as whether that plaque causes luminal narrowing. To date, the prognosis of individuals with CAC but without stenosis has not been reported. We explored the prevalence of CAC>0 and its prognostic utility for future mortality for patients without luminal narrowing by CCTA. METHODS: From 17 sites in 9 countries, we identified patients without known coronary artery disease, who underwent CAC scoring and CCTA, and were followed for >3 years. CCTA was graded for % stenosis according to a modified American Heart Association 16-segment model. We calculated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for incident mortality and compared risk of death for patients as a function of presence or absence of CAC and presence or absence of luminal narrowing by CCTA. RESULTS: Among 6656 patients who underwent CCTA and CAC scoring, 399 patients (6.0%) had no coronary luminal narrowing but CAC>0. During a median follow-up of 5.1 years (IQR: 3.9-5.9 years), 456 deaths occurred. Compared to individuals without luminal narrowing or CAC, individuals without luminal narrowing but CAC>0 were older, more likely to be male and had higher rates of diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. Individuals without luminal narrowing but CAC experienced a 2-fold increased risk of mortality, with increasing risk of mortality with higher CAC score. Following adjustment, incident death persisted (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.9, p = 0.02) among patients without luminal narrowing but with CAC>0 compared with patients whose CACS = 0. Individuals without luminal narrowing but CAC ≥100 had mortality risks similar to individuals with non-obstructive CAD (0 < stenosis<50%) by CCTA [HR 2.5 (95% CI 1.3-4.9) and 2.2 (95% CI 1.6-3.0), respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Patients without luminal narrowing but with CAC experience greater risk of 5-year mortality. Patients with CAC score ≥100 and no coronary luminal narrowing experience death rates similar to those with non-obstructive CAD.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring is a predictor of future adverse clinical events, and a surrogate measure of overall coronary artery plaque burden. Coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) is a contrast-enhanced method that allows for visualization of plaque as well as whether that plaque causes luminal narrowing. To date, the prognosis of individuals with CAC but without stenosis has not been reported. We explored the prevalence of CAC>0 and its prognostic utility for future mortality for patients without luminal narrowing by CCTA. METHODS: From 17 sites in 9 countries, we identified patients without known coronary artery disease, who underwent CAC scoring and CCTA, and were followed for >3 years. CCTA was graded for % stenosis according to a modified American Heart Association 16-segment model. We calculated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for incident mortality and compared risk of death for patients as a function of presence or absence of CAC and presence or absence of luminal narrowing by CCTA. RESULTS: Among 6656 patients who underwent CCTA and CAC scoring, 399 patients (6.0%) had no coronary luminal narrowing but CAC>0. During a median follow-up of 5.1 years (IQR: 3.9-5.9 years), 456 deaths occurred. Compared to individuals without luminal narrowing or CAC, individuals without luminal narrowing but CAC>0 were older, more likely to be male and had higher rates of diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. Individuals without luminal narrowing but CAC experienced a 2-fold increased risk of mortality, with increasing risk of mortality with higher CAC score. Following adjustment, incident death persisted (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.9, p = 0.02) among patients without luminal narrowing but with CAC>0 compared with patients whose CACS = 0. Individuals without luminal narrowing but CAC ≥100 had mortality risks similar to individuals with non-obstructive CAD (0 < stenosis<50%) by CCTA [HR 2.5 (95% CI 1.3-4.9) and 2.2 (95% CI 1.6-3.0), respectively]. CONCLUSIONS:Patients without luminal narrowing but with CAC experience greater risk of 5-year mortality. Patients with CAC score ≥100 and no coronary luminal narrowing experience death rates similar to those with non-obstructive CAD.
Authors: W G Austen; J E Edwards; R L Frye; G G Gensini; V L Gott; L S Griffith; D C McGoon; M L Murphy; B B Roe Journal: Circulation Date: 1975-04 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Robert C Hendel; Manesh R Patel; Christopher M Kramer; Michael Poon; Robert C Hendel; James C Carr; Nancy A Gerstad; Linda D Gillam; John McB Hodgson; Raymond J Kim; Christopher M Kramer; John R Lesser; Edward T Martin; Joseph V Messer; Rita F Redberg; Geoffrey D Rubin; John S Rumsfeld; Allen J Taylor; Wm Guy Weigold; Pamela K Woodard; Ralph G Brindis; Robert C Hendel; Pamela S Douglas; Eric D Peterson; Michael J Wolk; Joseph M Allen; Manesh R Patel Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-10-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Eleanore S J Kröner; Joella E van Velzen; Mark J Boogers; Hans-Marc J Siebelink; Martin J Schalij; Lucia J Kroft; Albert de Roos; Ernst E van der Wall; J Wouter Jukema; Johan H C Reiber; Joanne D Schuijf; Jeroen J Bax Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2011-04-08 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Hyung-Bok Park; Ran Heo; Bríain Ó Hartaigh; Iksung Cho; Heidi Gransar; Ryo Nakazato; Jonathon Leipsic; G B John Mancini; Bon-Kwon Koo; Hiromasa Otake; Matthew J Budoff; Daniel S Berman; Andrejs Erglis; Hyuk-Jae Chang; James K Min Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-01
Authors: James K Min; Allison Dunning; Fay Y Lin; Stephan Achenbach; Mouaz H Al-Mallah; Daniel S Berman; Matthew J Budoff; Filippo Cademartiri; Tracy Q Callister; Hyuk-Jae Chang; Victor Cheng; Kavitha M Chinnaiyan; Benjamin Chow; Augustin Delago; Martin Hadamitzky; Jorg Hausleiter; Ronald P Karlsberg; Philipp Kaufmann; Erica Maffei; Khurram Nasir; Michael J Pencina; Gilbert L Raff; Leslee J Shaw; Todd C Villines Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2011-02-01
Authors: Matthew J Budoff; Leslee J Shaw; Sandy T Liu; Steven R Weinstein; Tristen P Mosler; Philip H Tseng; Ferdinand R Flores; Tracy Q Callister; Paolo Raggi; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-04-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Robert Detrano; Alan D Guerci; J Jeffrey Carr; Diane E Bild; Gregory Burke; Aaron R Folsom; Kiang Liu; Steven Shea; Moyses Szklo; David A Bluemke; Daniel H O'Leary; Russell Tracy; Karol Watson; Nathan D Wong; Richard A Kronmal Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-03-27 Impact factor: 91.245