Was at my cardiologist today and he wants me to get a Coronary Calcium Scan done based on my family history; my Dad's father passed away from a heart attack when my Dad was 12 and my Dad had a quintuple-bypass done at age 58. My LDL is 140 and HDL is 40 and total cholesterol score is 201.

Are they useful? Worth it?

I'd just get a cath if there was anything to be concerned with. The new CTs do a pretty good job from what I understand, but I think it's pretty tough to beat a cath. They go in via the radial artery these days, so...easy peasy.

It’s a safe, easy procedure for the patient.
Very high correlation of calcium detected to plaque present in arteries supplying blood to the heart muscle. Plaque in your blood vessels, like grease in your drain pipes, is not good.
The hardware & math is pretty interesting.

No reason not to if your doc is prescribing it. It's not an end-all on evaluating risk but is a good tool. I would strongly recommend you verify both the facility and the interpreting radiologist are in your payer network and that, if needed, you get your insurance company to pre-certify. Otherwise you'll be on the hook for what is a huge bill. I don't mean several hundred, I mean several thousand dollars.

I had one a couple years ago and prior to asked a radiologist friend of mine w/r/t balance of need/risk/exposure issues. His advice was a for a 50 YO guy who was a few pounds heavy to have it done. As to radiation exposure his analogy was it was less than the incremental exposure of a flight from DFW to Denver and not to sweat it since I'd not had any other imaging anytime recently.

They will run an IV with contrast material very briefly midway through the study. The tech should advise you that you will feel a warm flush, especially in areas with high gland concentrations like groin and armpits. They will tell you it is a sudden rush of warmth and you will feel like you need to or are going to pee. You won't but there is simply no way they could overemphasize the intensity of this feeling, although incredibly brief. I wish someone had told me what I've just told you.

My score was 0, which for the first time in my life was a passing grade.

Good luck!

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
I'd just get a cath if there was anything to be concerned with.

That's not really a primary, generalized diagnostic tool for a case like the OP has described. What is key to what you've described is if, as you noted, there's "...anything to be concerned with.". The calcium scoring is an easy step to determine if further diagnosis is actually needed, perhaps including a cath procedure.

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:
No reason not to if your doc is prescribing it. It's not an end-all on evaluating risk but is a good tool. I would strongly recommend you verify both the facility and the interpreting radiologist are in your payer network and that, if needed, you get your insurance company to pre-certify. Otherwise you'll be on the hook for what is a huge bill. I don't mean several hundred, I mean several thousand dollars.

Really?

The doc told me it was going to be $150; it's at the hospital that he's part of.

It's not covered by my insurance but I confirmed already I can use HSA $ to pay for it.

I had my first five years ago at 57.

Score was zero.

I’d do it, if only for the peace of mind to help head off future CV problems.

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:
No reason not to if your doc is prescribing it. It's not an end-all on evaluating risk but is a good tool. I would strongly recommend you verify both the facility and the interpreting radiologist are in your payer network and that, if needed, you get your insurance company to pre-certify. Otherwise you'll be on the hook for what is a huge bill. I don't mean several hundred, I mean several thousand dollars.

Really?

The doc told me it was going to be $150; it's at the hospital that he's part of.

It's not covered by my insurance but I confirmed already I can use HSA $ to pay for it.

That's probably about right in coverage. If this was being charged to you at "full fee" by a hospital in PA I'd expect the base charge to be at least $1000, before the insurance discount. If it's in network and precerted should't be over a couple hundred. Medicare rate's about $125 I think. Yeah, the crazy world of medical list-prices vs. contracted prices.....

Let 'er rip, and let us know how you enjoy it.

Had one last month. My score was also zero. Cost $99.00. No contrast used. Great peace of mind, you could also check into an ultrasound of the carotid arteries and of your heart. There is much that can be learned from them. I was very suprised at my results due to my love of foods that are unhealthy .

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:
No reason not to if your doc is prescribing it. It's not an end-all on evaluating risk but is a good tool. I would strongly recommend you verify both the facility and the interpreting radiologist are in your payer network and that, if needed, you get your insurance company to pre-certify. Otherwise you'll be on the hook for what is a huge bill. I don't mean several hundred, I mean several thousand dollars.

Really?

The doc told me it was going to be $150; it's at the hospital that he's part of.

It's not covered by my insurance but I confirmed already I can use HSA $ to pay for it.

You are right, I had one done, same scenario, no insurance, cost $99 at my hospital.

Took about 15 minutes, they attach some electrodes, run you through the CT scan a few times, no contrast. Results are given as an approximate number and you compare to a group of 4 different ranges if I remember correctly,

I just had the calcium score done last month at the request of my cardiologist. Insurance didn’t cover it, but I only paid $75. My score was zero!

I had rather extensive 2 day work up a few years ago. The 'calcium index' number is lost to my memory, but they did have some kind of "not zero" numbers. Which led to other tests. Which led to an angiogram. Which led to eventually the cardiologist following me for a couple years then saying to check back in 'if needed' or in a couple years....no big deal.

I did/do have long history of abnormal angina periodically, which several layers of specialists have decided to label as "non=clinically important" or some such.

Have nitro sublingual on hand never felt the need to use.

I had one 2 years ago at the suggestion of my doctor's stand-in. Got the results back and they were zero. Great news, but....you have an aortic aneurism. So now we have a cardiologist and get to have a CT with contrast once a year. Immediately on blood pressure medicine and a statin. Hoping it doesn't grow and have to get openned up for repair. I guess I would recommend having the scan. $100 well spent. good luck PAsig.

had one done a few years ago,
intercardia was the folks that were doing it IIRC

grading was such that a 0 was not possible, but I was considered good, (as in no worries)


had a CT/MRI with contrast for kidney stones, maybe a few months later

while he had my scans up on the big screen he showed me about a dozen small stones in each kidney,, and a few minor spots on an artery,

when asked what they were and if there are any concerns, he said I was 'unremarkable' as in no worries, everything was normal for someone my age and history,

stones too,, dammit