Evidence Hub

The Prognostic Value of CAC Zero Among Individuals Presenting With Chest Pain: A Meta-Analysis

A. Agha, Justin M. Pacor, Gowtham R. Grandhi, Reed Mszar, Safi U. Khan, R. Parikh, Tanushree Agrawal, J. Burt et al.

JACC Cardiovascular Imaging, 2022

92,000 participants · 83 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is little consensus on whether absence of coronary artery calcium (CAC) can identify patients with chest pain (CP) who can safely avoid additional downstream testing.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the utility of CAC assessment for ruling out obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) among patients with stable and acute CP, at low-to-intermediate risk of obstructive CAD undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA).

METHODS

The authors searched online databases for studies published between 2005 and 2021 examining the relationship between CAC and obstructive CAD (≥50% coronary luminal narrowing) on coronary CTA among patients with stable and acute CP.

RESULTS

In this review, the authors included 19 papers comprising 79,903 patients with stable CP and 13 papers including 12,376 patients with acute CP undergoing simultaneous CAC and coronary CTA assessment. Overall, 45% (95% CI: 40%-50%) of patients with stable CP and 58% (95% CI: 50%-66%) of patients with acute CP had CAC = 0. The negative predictive values for CAC = 0 ruling out obstructive CAD were 97% (95% CI: 96%-98%) and 98% (95% CI: 96%-99%) among patients with stable and acute CP, respectively. Additionally, the prevalence of nonobstructive CAD among those with CAC = 0 was 13% (95% CI: 10%-16%) among those with stable CP and 9% (95% CI: 5%-13%) among those with acute CP. A CAC score of zero predicted a low incidence of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 92,000 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free