The Underappreciated Impact of Heart Disease

Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA.
Women s Health Issues (Impact Factor: 1.61). 09/2010; 20(5):299-303. DOI: 10.1016/j.whi.2010.05.001
Source: PubMed


The 2009 recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force regarding mammography have called attention to the roles of prevention and screening in promoting women's health. We take this opportunity to raise awareness of another devastating illness in women, ischemic heart disease, and to suggest that screening for ischemic heart disease, by providing early detection and identifying women who would benefit most from intensified medical therapy, merits consideration.

Download full-text


Available from: Ronald P Karlsberg, Oct 29, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Traditional risk factors for cardiovascular disease such as systemic hypertension and hypercholesterolemia, all described more than half a century ago, are relatively few in number. Efforts to expand the epidemiologic canon have met with limited success because of the high hurdle of causality. Fortunately, another solution to current deficiencies in risk assessment-in particular, the underestimation of risk both before and after initiation of pharmacotherapy-may exist. Parallel to the investigation of novel biomarkers, such as high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, ongoing research has yielded improved metrics of known causative conditions. This evolution of traditional risk factors, heralded by measures such as ambulatory blood pressure, central hemodynamics, low density lipoprotein particle concentration, genetic testing, and "vascular age," may better address the detection gap in cardiovascular disease.
    Cardiology in review 12/2011; 20(3):118-29. DOI:10.1097/CRD.0b013e318239b924 · 2.41 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Although numerous trials have demonstrated the diagnostic accuracy of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scanning for prediction of obstructive disease, virtually all studies have been performed using Electron Beam CT (EBCT). We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of CAC by 64-row CT to detect obstructive coronary stenosis compared to quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) in the ACCURACY multicenter trial. METHODS: 16 sites prospectively enrolled 230 patients (pts) [59.5% males, 57yrs] with chest pain referred for invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Pts underwent CAC scan and CT angiography prior to ICA. Total CAC scores were correlated with angiographically documented stenoses using common cutpoints of CAC >0, >100 and >400. Significant obstructive disease was defined as >50% luminal stenosis by QCA. RESULTS: The per-patient accuracy of CAC by 64-row CT compared to QCA demonstrates a high sensitivity and low specificity for the presence of obstructive disease (>50% stenosis on QCA). With CAC >0, >100 and >400, the sensitivities to predict stenosis were 98%, 88%, and 60%, whereas the specificities were 42%, 71%, and 88%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Most previous CAC studies have focused on the fact that significant calcium places patients into a higher risk group in terms of future events, and should lead to more aggressive treatment with preventative therapies. This prospective multicenter results comparing 64-row CAC to QCA demonstrate that CAC using 64-row CT scanner, similar to previously published reports using EBCT, is highly sensitive and moderately specific test to predict significant coronary artery stenosis. The presence of abnormal levels of calcium may place patients into a higher risk group in terms of future events, and lead to more aggressive treatment with preventative therapies. However, the detection of calcium does not always help with a clinical diagnosis particularly in the presence of diffuse moderate coronary atheroma. Whether this information is complementary to CTA data remains to be validated.
    International journal of cardiology 12/2011; 166(2). DOI:10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.11.031 · 4.04 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of mortality in the US and worldwide, and no widespread screening for this number one killer has been implemented. Traditional risk factor assessment does not fully account for the coronary risk and underestimates the prediction of risk even in patients with established risk factors for atherosclerosis. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) represents calcified atherosclerosis in the coronary arteries. It has been shown to be the strongest predictor of adverse future cardiovascular events and provides incremental information to the traditional risk factors. CAC consistently outperforms traditional risk factors, including models such as Framingham risk to predict future CV events. It has been incorporated into both the European and American guidelines for risk assessment. CAC is the most robust test today to reclassify individuals based on traditional risk factor assessment and provides the opportunity to better strategize the treatments for these subjects (converting patients from intermediate to high or low risk). CAC progression has also been identified as a risk for future cardiovascular events, with markedly increased events occurring in those patients exhibiting increases in calcifications over time. The exact intervals for rescanning is still being evaluated.
    09/2012; 2012:812046. DOI:10.6064/2012/812046
Show more