ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention2025
Inadequacy of coronary calcium scoring in evaluating coronary artery disease: A call to shifting to high-resolution CT coronary imaging.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Elevated lipoprotein(a) and adverse outcomes in advanced coronary artery calcification: An intravascular ultrasound study.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2026Article
- Multimodal Detection of Subclinical Cardiovascular Disease in Chronic Kidney Disease.Cardiorenal medicine · 2026Review
- Precision management of severe coronary artery calcification with concomitant left ventricular outflow tract obstruction: a case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Plaques Do Not Act Alone: Time to Redefine Coronary Vulnerability from Lesion to Phenotype.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring is an increasingly adopted, non-invasive modality for assessing coronary artery disease (CAD). However, its diagnostic reliability in comparison to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) remains controversial. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of CAC scoring in predicting CAD using ICA as the reference. Methods: Adults who underwent both coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) with CAC scoring and ICA within a three-month interval were retrospectively analyzed between 2018 and 2024. Obstructive CAD was defined as ≥ 50% stenosis on ICA. Patients were stratified by CAC scores: 0 (group 1), 1-399 (group 2), and ≥400 (group 3). Chi-square analysis was utilized to assess the differences in CAC scores compared to ICA. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of CAC against ICA were all calculated using R version 4.4.0. Results: Among 110 patients (mean age 53 ± 10; 86.4% males), obstructive CAD was found in 25% of patients in group 1, 56% of patients in group 2, and 79% of patients in group 3 (χ Conclusion: While a CAC score of 400 or higher strongly predicts significant CAD, scores of zero or intermediate values fail to exclude obstructive disease reliably. These findings reaffirm that CAC scoring is a useful stratification tool but should be interpreted with caution, particularly in high-risk patients, and confirmed with ICA when appropriate.
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.