Association of Age With the Diagnostic Value of Coronary Artery Calcium Score for Ruling Out Coronary Stenosis in Symptomatic Patients
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: The diagnostic value is unclear of a 0 coronary artery calcium (CAC) score to rule out obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) and near-term clinical events across different age groups. Objective: To assess the diagnostic value of a CAC score of 0 for reducing the likelihood of obstructive CAD and to assess the implications of such a CAC score and obstructive CAD across different age groups. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study obtained data from the Western Denmark Heart Registry and had a median follow-up time of 4.3 years. Included patients were aged 18 years or older who underwent computed tomography angiography (CTA) between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2017, because of symptoms that were suggestive of CAD. Data analysis was performed from April 5 to July 7, 2021. Exposures: Obstructive CAD, which was defined as 50% or more luminal stenosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of individuals with obstructive CAD who had a CAC score of 0. Risk-adjusted diagnostic likelihood ratios were used to assess the diagnostic value of a CAC score of 0 for reducing the likelihood of obstructive CAD beyond clinical variables. Risk factors associated with myocardial infarction and death were estimated. Results: A total of 23 759 symptomatic patients, of whom 12 771 (54%) had a CAC score of 0, were included. This cohort had a median (IQR) age of 58 (49-65) years and was primarily composed of women (13 160 [55%]). Overall, the prevalence of obstructive CAD was relatively low across all age groups, ranging from 3% (39 of 1278 patients) in those who were younger than 40 years to 8% (52 of 619) among those who were 70 years or older. In patients with obstructive CAD, 14% (725 of 5043) had a CAC score of 0, and the prevalence varied across age groups from 58% (39 of 68) among those who were younger than 40 years, 34% (192 of 562) among those aged 40 to 49 years, 18% (268 of 1486) among those aged 50 to 59 years, 9% (174 of 1963) among those aged 60 to 69 years, to 5% (52 of 964) among those who were 70 years or older. The added diagnostic value of a CAC score of 0 decreased at a younger age, with a risk factor-adjusted diagnostic likelihood ratio of a CAC score of 0 ranging from 0.68 (approximately 32% lower likelihood of obstructive CAD than expected) in those who were younger than 40 years to 0.18 (approximately 82% lower likelihood than expected) in those who were 70 years or older. The presence of obstructive vs nonobstructive CAD among those with a CAC score of 0 was associated with a multivariable adjusted hazard ratio of 1.51 (95% CI, 0.98-2.33) for myocardial infarction and all-cause death; however, this hazard ratio varied from 1.80 (95% CI, 1.02-3.19) in those who were younger than 60 years to 1.24 (95% CI, 0.64-2.39) in those who were 60 years or older. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that the diagnostic value of a CAC score of 0 to rule out obstructive CAD beyond clinical variables was dependent on age, with the added diagnostic value being smaller for younger patients. In symptomatic patients who were younger than 60 years, a sizable proportion of obstructive CAD occurred among those without CAC and was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction and all-cause death.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».