ArticleCJC open2025
Impact of Zero Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring on Downstream Cardiac Testing and Cardiac Outcomes Compared With No Testing.
Article in CJC open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The impact of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring on downstream resource utilisation and outcomes remains unclear, especially in those with zero CAC. Methods: Consecutive CAC scores from two academic hospitals in Toronto, Ontario, were linked to population-based databases. Subjects with zero CAC without previous cardiovascular disease were propensity score matched with a non-CAC-tested control group for age, sex, cardiovascular risk factors, and comorbidities. Downstream cardiac testing, acute myocardial infarction, heart failure (HF) hospitalisations, and HF emergency department (ED) visits were compared between the 2 groups. Results: A total of 4884 patients underwent CAC scoring, of whom 2709 had zero CAC (mean 52.9 ± 10.6 years), 55.4% women. At 3.4 years, graded-stress testing (hazard ratio [HR] 1.24, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.14-1.35), stress echocardiography (HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.59-2.05), and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (HR 3.40, 95% CI 2.55-4.53) use was higher in the zero CAC group, whereas myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.97-1.21) and catheterisation (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.91-1.44) were similar and percutaneous coronary intervention (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.35-0.98) and coronary artery bypass grafting (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.61) were lower. There was an approximately 5-fold lower rate of myocardial infarction (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.10-0.51) in the zero CAC group and no difference in HF hospitalisations (HR 1.15, CI 95% 0.53-2.48) or ED admissions (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.58-2.52). Conclusions: Our results support the utility of zero CAC in limiting interventional cardiovascular procedures while maintaining an association with reduced downstream cardiovascular events.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.