Correlation between Coronary Artery Calcium- and Different Cardiovascular Risk Score-Based Methods for the Estimation...

Area of Science:

• Cardiology
• Preventive Medicine
• Medical Imaging

Background:

• Vascular age estimation is crucial for cardiovascular risk assessment.
• Traditional methods include Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE).
• Coronary Artery Calcium Score (CACS) has emerged as a novel arterial age assessment tool.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the vascular age determined by FRS, SCORE, and CACS.
• To evaluate the agreement between these different vascular age assessment methods.
• To identify potential discrepancies in vascular age estimation across risk profiles.

Main Methods:

• Vascular age was calculated for 241 Caucasian patients using FRS, SCORE, and CACS based on established methodologies.
• Coronary CT angiography was performed for CACS assessment.
• Statistical analysis, including intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), was used to compare the methods.

Main Results:

• Vascular ages derived from FRS, SCORE, and CACS were significantly different (68.0, 63.0, and 47.1 years, respectively).
• FRS and SCORE showed strong correlation (ICC: 0.91), while CACS moderately correlated with FRS and SCORE (ICC: ~0.66).
• A substantial proportion of patients exhibited a higher vascular age than chronological age, with traditional scores tending to overestimate vascular age compared to CACS, particularly in lower-risk individuals.

Conclusions:

• Significant discrepancies exist in vascular age estimation using FRS, SCORE, and CACS.
• Coronary Artery Calcium Score may offer a more precise vascular age assessment, potentially avoiding overestimation seen with traditional risk scores in certain patient groups.
• Further prospective research is needed to determine the clinical utility of these vascular age calculations in cardiovascular prevention strategies.