Posted on 03/15/2022 12:54:21 PM PDT by ConservativeMind
Cardiac computed tomography (CT) was as reliable as catheterization—the current standard diagnostic test for intermediate-risk patients—in people with suspected coronary artery disease.
A comprehensive analysis of the study's results suggests that CT offers a similar level of diagnostic accuracy, in addition to being associated with a lower risk of complications.
The research team recruited 48 patients into the trial, who underwent either invasive coronary angiography or CT coronary angiography. The team followed study participants up over approximately four years.
Coronary artery disease (CAD) is common across the globe and is one of the leading causes of death in developed countries and aging populations. Symptoms of CAD are caused by deposits inside the artery walls which build up over many years.
The current standard diagnostic test for coronary artery disease is a minimally invasive procedure known as coronary angiography (or cardiac catheterization). This test shows if the coronary arteries supply a sufficient amount of blood or whether blood flow is impaired by arterial narrowing.
Prof. Dewey said: "The trial confirmed that a CT-based management is safe in patients with stable (i.e., non-acute) chest pain and suspected coronary artery disease."
He added: "Among the patients referred for cardiac catheterization and included in this trial, the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was found to be similar in both the CT and catheterization groups, occurring in 2.1% and 3.0% of patients, respectively. The incidence of major procedure-related complications was found to be four-times lower in patients managed with an initial CT strategy."
(Excerpt) Read more at medicalxpress.com ...
I had an artery on my heart in which I was able to reverse the calcium plaque to nothing, at some point over three years. I also have been taking supplements and eating better to reduce or eliminate soft plaques, but can’t speak to that progress from current testing. A preventative MRI full body scan I plan in the near future may help with that, and I will report what I find.
This is a post from an earlier thread in which I pulled some of these things together for Pollard:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/4044326/posts?page=40#40
What complications can you have from a CT scan? I would have thought this would be 100% fewer complications.
Maybe they meant less complication for lower costs/billings?
I can see where Hospital billings cause complications. Probably cause more heart attacks than blocked arteries.
Fewer complications than cardiac catheterization.
Probably would have saved my father-in-law’s life. Catheter dislodge some calcium, lodged in a renal artery and killed one of his kidneys. Resulted in a cascade of complications that finally killed him late last summer.
The sort of test they likely used was one with iodine contrast, to light things up.
As long as the contrast is heated to body temperature, and is a newer agent, it should be fine.
False positives and false negatives are taken into account as “side effects” or adverse outcomes for imaging studies. Although a cardiac CT does not use contrast, other imaging studies do and can cause allergic reaction and or kidney problems.
The Cardiac CT is a nice study to have, but doesn’t really take the place of any existing studies. It is a static test (image) so does not give dynamic feedback such as a stress test, and of course, a heart catheter can treat CAD via angioplasty and stent placement. Cardiac CTs are nice when patients do not want to treat their blood pressure or take statins etc, and then can be shown what sort of disease burden their coronary arteries are actually carrying to add information to the discussion.
Similarly, MRI with a 3T machine is much better at identifying prostate cancer than any other method including biopsy. Lots of urologists don’t want to hear that. You don’t even need a radiologist to read the scan, computer program does it.
Lot of lucrative cath labs will fight this like the plague. The cath lab is a gold mine for cardiologists just like sturgeons do well on colonoscopys.
What supplements do you take?
I take more than a few, and the list would be something I’d need to compile.
Part of what I do is try new supplements, to be able to see what effect they have on me, prior to recommending them to others, so this means I am trialling at least one thing new, most of the time.
I’ll note your request and see about posting them sometime. When I do, I’ll be sure to copy you in on it.
If you have something of interest, it would be quicker for me to tell you what I’d do or take.
“The Cardiac CT is a nice study to have, but doesn’t really take the place of any existing studies. It is a static test (image) so does not give dynamic feedback such as a stress test, and of course, a heart catheter can treat CAD via angioplasty and stent placement. Cardiac CTs are nice when patients do not want to treat their blood pressure or take statins etc, and then can be shown what sort of disease burden their coronary arteries are actually carrying to add information to the discussion.”
My reluctance to take statins - after they immediately started causing severe muscle cramps - was exactly why my PCP suggested a cardiac CT. The result was an almost off-the-charts high score, so he ordered a stress test.
I had it done at a large heart-health hospital and it was interpreted by the chief cardiologist. My time-to-exhaustion was 50% greater than the norm for my age/sex, and the color Doppler echocardiogram showed no anomalies. He said that the cardiac CT was a useful guideline but that it was by no means absolute. He said he had patients with a score of 5000 (mine was 1250) with no issues, and some with a score of zero who had arterial blockage.
Prior to getting called away for an emergency, he mentioned something about my score being possibly related to a “genetic polymorphism” but he wasn’t able to elaborate. He said that if I managed the obvious risk factors (weight, BP, etc), my risk for a cardiac event should be no higher than average for man my age.
Well all those fancy test missed my 95 and 97 percent blockages.
It was only when I was in the cath lab and had 3 stents put in.
When they can start inserting stints and doing bypasses with a CT scan, then it will be a good way to know if you have heart disease... There is nothing more efficient and more sure and certain than a catheter being inserted into your arm or thigh.
Yup, Bingo. I’m glad they found them and you got them fixed. Exactly the “side effect” of an imaging study - false negatives can be a real deal.
Ionizing radiation is not good for you. It would be nice if a patient’s lifetime exposure was documented somewhere, it isn’t and from what I have experienced, the doctors act like each test is a stand alone event, whereas it is cumulative.
“A preventative MRI full body scan I plan in the near future”
There is a company in the Raleigh are which offers a thoracic CT scan at a ridiculously low price, presumably to sell you on the much more expensive full body version. I ask the Dr, but he never heard of it. I wonder if this is really worth it.
Glad you are with us. I had those ct scans and they hinted at problems. I now have 3 stents after they brought me back on the table in the er.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.