Paul Saladino· MD
But like I said, it's not my go-to right off the bat. Get the CAC first. Yeah.
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
But like I said, it's not my go-to right off the bat. Get the CAC first. Yeah.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
And that's not blood work. That's imaging. And that's the other key piece that I put in. Let's look at the blood vessels of the heart if that's what we're ultimately concerned about. So like a clearly scan or a CT corner angiogram or Exactly. Or just start with a CAC scan is a great way to start.
the older a patient gets the more I would probably rely on things like CT angiogram or even usually by the time they're older a calcium score becomes less relevant calcium score can be somewhat helpful in a younger patient though but it's you know the latest study I saw which actually just was an editorial that came out two days ago based on a study and one of the atherosclerosis journals was you know looking at 50% of patients that had Lee that had events had them at the site of non calcified lesions not a huge vote of confidence for Hawaiian note a low calcium score is that helpful
The older a patient gets, the more I would probably rely on things like CT angiograms or even usually by the time they're older, a calcium score becomes less relevant. Calcium score can be somewhat helpful in a younger patient though. But the latest study I saw, which actually just was an editorial that came out two days ago based on a study in one of the atherosclerosis journals, was looking at 50% of patients that had events had them at the site of non-calcified lesions. Not a huge vote of confidence for why a low calcium score is that helpful.