Cardiac CT Scan for Calcium

tangomonster

Full time employment: Posting here.
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
757
GroupOn has a deal today for, all of all things, a cardiac CT scan to detect the level of calcification. $19; supposedly a $499 value. DH is all psyched about this. I'm not sure it's worth being exposed to radiation and not sure what could be done if calcification is shown. We already eat well and exercise.

Opinions?
 
We had it done a couple of years ago at our doctor's request. Not covered by insurance, but the full retail cost was only $99 so that may not be as big a discount as they claim.

My understanding is that the amount of calcification in your coronary arteries will give you an idea of whether you're at no, low, medium, or high risk. That's pretty much it -- a fairly blunt instrument.
 
My doc recommended this to me.... I will be doing it early next year...


From what he said, it is a better indicator of heart problems than a stress test....
 
I would definetely get one . My Brother died of heart disease in his early 50's and my sister who is thin,exercises daily & eats right just had a heart attack.
 
We had it done a couple of years ago at our doctor's request. Not covered by insurance, but the full retail cost was only $99 so that may not be as big a discount as they claim.

My understanding is that the amount of calcification in your coronary arteries will give you an idea of whether you're at no, low, medium, or high risk. That's pretty much it -- a fairly blunt instrument.

I could have written this post. Exactly what I paid. My father had his first (of 5) heart attacks at 45 years old so it was worth the peace of mind to me.
 
A asked a cardiologist friend and he said that calcium test was a good one to get if you are concerned. Eating well and exercising is great but sometimes there are other factors, such as who you were born to.
 
What do you do with the results?

Change your eating habits/exercise? I know I should already be doing that - and I have but there is always room for improvement?

Is the correlation between the results and heart attacks firmly established?
 
Both my doc and the cardiologist said taking statins would be the next step for me, since I already get plenty of cardio exercise.

I can't quantify the correlation. When I looked into it, it seemed to be the most accurate. It detects buildup in the arteries early. I don't know enough about the heart to know how likely you are to have a heart attack without clogged arteries, which this test wouldn't catch.
 
Is $19 the FULL charge? Might there be a (higher, much higher) charge for "reading" the test?

I considered having one when I decided not to take statins due to side effects, which I now believe I shouldn't have even been prescribed statins. Dr. presented it to me as an option. My overall risk is 2%. So I just decided not to go there. I basically know what I "should do" to optimize my health: exercise more, eat more healthy foods. I don't do too badly, but there is always room for improvement.

So for you/your dh, I would ask... what is your risk factor right now for heart attack? Will you work diligently towards improving your risk if the results indicate you should? If you already know that you have some/lots of room to improve (i.e. diet, exercise, quit smoking, lose wt, etc) then, really, you don't need a test result to get started ... "just do it".
 
Cash price at my hospital five years ago was about $300. My HMO had agreed to pay for it, then decided they hadn't approved, resulting in a bill of $2,500. Fortunately, I appealed with a copy of their approval and the bill went away. The good news was I had zero calcium.
 
Thanks for your replies. You convinced me to go for it. I can be cheap, but it seemed worth $38 for me and DH to get it done---much less expensive both financially and physically than a heart attack.

Seems to be on the up and up. Fine print says that married couples must redeem at the same time---what's up with that? Must be between 45 and 72 years of age. No metallic implants. Max weight 320 pounds. Under 6'4". Includes a consultation with the doctor who reads it and drafts a letter about it to your doctor.
 
Had it done yesterday---will post about the experience later and what they wanted to upsell us.

My results were perfect. A score of 0, meaning I have absolutely no plaque.

My husband, on the other hand, even though thin, exercising daily, and eating a healthy vegetarian diet tested as having more plaque than 88% of men 55 to 59 years old---and a score of 450, meaning a very high risk.

He is ending the info to the cardiologist. We'll see if he has to take statins. Very discouraged and a little frightened....
 
If it might help, here's another thought for your DH:

When I had my calcium score done a couple of years ago, it was over 350 total (they should have broken it down by area, but it's simplest to deal with a total score). My doc told me that it might or might not indicate a current problem. He said sometimes there is some calcification due to a situation at a much younger age, and since it never goes away, it might not be a cause for concern at all.

Your doc might suggest a coronary CT scan. Considerably more expensive, and probably won't give you any more information than you already have, but it's definitely worth spending some time listening to your cardiologist. Still, you might not have as much to worry about as you think you do.
 
I wouldn't get too discouraged until DH has a chance to meet with his cardiologist and I suspect the cardiologist will do some further tests, probably a stress echo cardiogram which can tell alot. Anyway, taking a statin is not the end of the world if it comes to that.
 
Thanks, Brau and DFW---you've made me feel a little better. We will see what the cardiologist says on the 24th.
 
An answer to the question of how a thin vegetarian who exercises a lot could develop heart disease can be found in the book, "Prevent and reverse heart disease" by Caldwell Esselstyn.
 
I found this old thread and decided to revive it to share my recent calcium score that currently has me in panic mode. My scan was last Friday and I got the results yesterday showing a composite score of 1057 putting me in the greater than 95 percentile for men my age (59) and an extreme risk.
I haven't spoken to my doctor yet, but hopefully will soon. My diet is not bad, but I can tweak it some. I've been taking red yeast rice, a natural stating for years, but I expect to be put on Lipitor or something similar once my doctor reviews these results. I'll be stepping up my exercise routine as best as I can with my next and lower back issues. My weight is good and I've never smoked.
Does anyone have any experience with such a high cardiac calcium score? Or should I just start planing for a quadruple bypass one of these days?



Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum
 
Hi Dash man - first of all, don't panic. This is not a death sentence, nor a guarantee that you're headed for a bypass or a heart attack, but your risk is higher than most your age, so it definitely deserves attention. Panicing will cause other reactions in your body that will make this worse, not better. In my opinion, ignorance is not bliss, and therefore I feel it is GOOD that you found out about your elevated score, because now you have an opportunity to change things because you know about them. Your first goal here is to reduce the rate of growth of your plaque. From there, we try to stabilize it - stable plaque is much less prone to rupture than soft, pliable, "dynamic" plaque. Completely stabilized plaque is almost as good as no plaque, but some (not many) are actually able to regress that plaque and lower their score that way.

First, what I've learned not to do, and let me preface that I am not a doctor and am not giving medical advice - just sharing my experience. If you're asymptomatic, i.e., no chest pain, shortness of breath, etc., I would NOT get any invasive test like a coronary catheterization - the risk is not warranted. I would NOT get a Thallium or any other kind of nuclear stress test - the huge radiation dose is not warranted. These are tests a doctor or cardiologist might recommend for you and you could end up with an unnecessary stent - don't get me wrong, stents can be life-saving, but are not indicated if you have no symptoms. Again, my (and many "preventive" cardiologists') opinion. The only stress test I might agree to is a non-invasive, echocardiogram.

What TO DO: You need to figure out the cause of your plaque so that a strategy can be devised (and there are many) to attack it. This involves some advanced bloodwork - specifically advanced lipoprotein analysis. Your doctor may or may not be willing to order these tests. The good news is there are plenty of doctors out there who will, and better news is you can order them by yourself without a doctor at all. When I started my journey in this area six years ago, I had to find a new doctor. The guy I had seen for 20 years, and who I personally liked very much, did not know what to do with my elevated CAC score, and his answer was "statin and monitor". That is not necessarily a good strategy and for me would have yielded disastrous results.

So Dash man, the choice is yours - you can be proactive and self-empowered, and begin to focus on a lot of things yourself, but I will tell you that it takes some work and takes some time. Some folks just don't want to invest that way and prefer to relegate their healthcare to their local doctor. It's all a choice man - and I totally respect everyone's right to choose!

I can help point you to names of specific tests, etc. that you could ask your doctor about. Could also point you to many other resources - just kinda trying to gauge your interest in how you want to tackle this.

But please, don't panic!
Pete
 
Last edited:
My PCP wants me to go se my cardiologist, so any suggestions of tests to ask about would be great. I'm not really in panic mode, just concerned and trying to figure out what to do. I want to avoid surgery if possible and any more radiation than necessary. Thanks for your input!


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum
 
I've been googling around, trying to figure out what statins would do for calcified arterial plaque.

So far, i haven't found very clear information. It looks as if the statins would keep more plaque from building up...but statins can't get rid of what your arteries have already laid down.

Someone else must have better information on this.

I considered having one when I decided not to take statins due to side effects, which I now believe I shouldn't have even been prescribed statins.
 
OK Dash man - these are the tests. These are three options that all provide similar reporting. They are listed in order starting with the best/most comprehensive. Many insurance companies are not big fans of this advanced testing, so if the doctor agrees to order them, you may want to check on what your financial responsibility will be.

1. "Baseline Assessment" from True Health Diagnostics, OR
2. "NMR Lipoprofile" from LipoScience, OR
3. "VAP" from Atherotech

Note that NMR Lipoprofiles are available from other than LipoScience, and VAPs are available from other than Atherotech. Those places are just the ones who developed and "own" the rights to the tests and I thought your cardio might recognize them. The "Baseline Assessment" is unique to True Health.

If the cost turns out to be too high I can provide other less comprehensive but also less expensive options.

There are two types of Cardiologists: Preventive and Interventional. I'd say 90% are Interventional. This means they recommend "procedures", which means you're headed to the Cath Lab and there's a good chance you'll be stented. Hospitals love these guys, as they bring in minimum $25,000 per procedure and can do multiple procedures in a day. This is how hospitals build Cardio wings onto their facilities. The Preventive guys are renegades in the Cardiology world - they only recommend procedures based on specific symptoms, otherwise, they're recommending diet, exercise, stress management, some supplements (like Fish Oil and Niacin perhaps), and possibly a statin if indicated.

So...best of luck and interested to hear how it goes!

Pete
 
Last edited:
I've been googling around, trying to figure out what statins would do for calcified arterial plaque.

So far, i haven't found very clear information. It looks as if the statins would keep more plaque from building up...but statins can't get rid of what your arteries have already laid down.

Someone else must have better information on this.
Amethyst, you're right...statins can't get rid of plaque, otherwise that would be the complete answer to a high plaque burden, and it's not. I am pretty much anti-statin, but I take a low-dose (5mg daily) of Lipitor as part of my plaque stabilization program. The reason is that one of the advanced tests has shown that I have high arterial-specific inflammation - likely one of the causes of my plaque to begin with. Statins do lower inflammation, so that's why I take it. Nothing to do with managing my cholesterol...I take it to try and reduce inflammation.

Pete
 
There are two types of Cardiologists: Preventive and Interventional. I'd say 90% are Interventional. This means they recommend "procedures", which means you're headed to the Cath Lab and there's a good chance you'll be stented.
If the guy wields a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

My first thought was that if your EKG was alright and you only found out about it when they took a peek at your carotid, maybe things aren't that bad (yet?). Echocardiograms don't use X-rays, so are safer than even your calcium score test. Not cheap though, apparently. Check on false positive rates with any test they do.

My BIL has several stent patents so you'd think he'd sing their praise, but a few things he's said and some things I've read suggest that they don't have better outcomes. Look at the results of high quality studies, especially mortality, and they don't look like such a great deal. DW used to do angiography, and says to stay away from that (and associated angioplasty). Here are some Consumer Reports links. Do you really need that stent? How to Treat Heart Disease Correctly - Consumer Reports
 
If the guy wields a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

My first thought was that if your EKG was alright and you only found out about it when they took a peek at your carotid, maybe things aren't that bad (yet?). Echocardiograms don't use X-rays, so are safer than even your calcium score test. Not cheap though, apparently. Check on false positive rates with any test they do.

My BIL has several stent patents so you'd think he'd sing their praise, but a few things he's said and some things I've read suggest that they don't have better outcomes. Look at the results of high quality studies, especially mortality, and they don't look like such a great deal. DW used to do angiography, and says to stay away from that (and associated angioplasty). Here are some Consumer Reports links. Do you really need that stent? How to Treat Heart Disease Correctly - Consumer Reports


I've heard the problem with stents is they take away the option for bypass surgery later on. The bypass extends life where the stents apparently don't have a good record of it.
I've had abnormal EKGs before that the cardiologists were not too concerned about.
I'll see what they say in about a month. That's when I have my appointment.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum
 
Back
Top Bottom