Does coronary XXXX scoring with a SCORE better predict significant @entity3979 than without? Correlation with computed tomography coronary angiography.

@entity1 @entity3979 @entity460 @entity1741 @entity453 @entity850
OBJECTIVE: To determine effectiveness of coronary artery @entity460 score (CACS) alone and combined with Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) in adult @entity1 for significant @entity3979 by using computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) as reference standard. METHODS: Two thousand twenty-one @entity1 with suspected @entity453 ( @entity453 ) underwent CACS test and CTCA. @entity1 were examined with dual-source CT and were grouped according to their age, gender, CACS, and estimated SCORE risk. Coronary plaque existence and degree of @entity850 were assessed with CTCA. Sensitivity, specificity, and ROC curves were analyzed. RESULTS: CACS was the single independent variable in estimating relative risk of critical @entity850 and had superior outcome when compared with SCORE risk in logistic regression and ROC curve. Area under the ROC curve was greatest in the interval between 50-59 years. When SCORE was combined with CACS in @entity1 with zero CACS, percentage of significant @entity850 increased from 1.4% to 7.0% in @entity1 with high or very high SCORE risk, and decreased to 0.9 % in @entity1 with low or moderate SCORE risk. CONCLUSIONS: CACS combination with SCORE risk predicts @entity3979 . When CACS is zero, CTCA can be performed in @entity1 with high or very high SCORE risk. KEY POINTS:     CACS is the major predictor of significant @entity850 in the sixth and seventh decade.     CACS has superior outcome when compared with SCORE.     Zero CACS is the most important negative predictor for significant @entity1741 .     Zero CACS, with SCORE better predicts significant @entity1741 .
