Why is calcium score significant? I know that hard plaque uses calcium to harden, but isn't this beneficial to form a cap over the more dangerous softer plaque? and don't soft muscle such as the heart/arteries require calcium to function? I would have thought the higher the calcium the better? I've never quite understood this.
Unfortunately, calcium scores do not dictate treatment. Normally, with questionable results your doctor will do a nuclear stress test to see if any areas of your heart muscle are affect by lack of oxygen due to diminished blood flow. It's a pretty easy test and is not invasive other than the tracer that is used to see the blood flow to your heart muscle. I don't think it would be normal to go right to a cath in a patient without any symptoms. Perhaps if your stress test was a Nuclear Stress test.
Was your first stress test a nuclear stress test? What was abnormal about it? What course of action did they recommend?
Let us know,
Jon
The heart scan I had originally (which I did just to see if I was ok) showed the LAD has 14 lesions with a Volume of 531.95 and total calcium score of 749.00. The RCA has 21 lesions witha Volume of 824.19 and total calcium score of 1042.61. The other 2 arteries are clear. The overall calcium Score was 1791.61. I assume that was over 70%. When the Dr. came out to talk to me she made it sound like I was going to drop right then in there. Scared the crap out of me, which is so strange because I feel absolutely fine.
It depends on how large any blockages are. Anything less than 70% is generally treated with meds, over 70% normally requires intervention, either stents or bypass. You may also have larger blockages but have also developed smaller collateral arteries that are supplying your heart around the blockage. My guess is since you are not having symptoms intervention may not be necessary. Did the doctor mention what percentages the blockages were?
Keep us informed and good luck,
Jon