You have a better tool. Use it with confidence.

Formal scientific statements published by the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III), the American Heart Association (AHA) and the American College of Cardiology (ACC) relating to the clinical efficacy, proposed use and prognostic value of the Electron Beam CT Coronary Calcium Score are profoundly clear:

NCEP ATPIII
“Measurement of coronary calcium is an option for advanced risk assessment in appropriately selected persons. In persons with multiple risk factors, high coronary calcium scores (e.g., 75th percentile for age and sex) denote advanced coronary atherosclerosis and provide a rationale for intensified LDL-lowering therapy. Moreover, measurement of coronary calcium is promising for older persons in whom the traditional risk factors lose some of their predictive power.”

ACC
“Recent evidence is supportive that measurement of Coronary Artery Calcium (CAC) is predictive of CHD death or MI at 3 to 5 years. Current evidence also suggests that the use of CAC is independently predictive of outcome over and above traditional cardiac risk factors.”

“The accumulating evidence suggests that asymptomatic individuals with an intermediate FRS may be reasonable candidates for CHD testing using CAC as a potential means of modifying risk prediction and altering therapy.”

AHA
“Coronary Artery Calcified Plaque, as determined by cardiac CT, documents the presence of coronary atherosclerosis, identifies individuals at elevated risk for myocardial infarction (MI) and CVD death, and adds significant predictive ability to the Framingham Score (an index of traditional CVD risk factors).”

“EBCT has undergone a 20-year period of testing for reliability and validity and is now established as a useful technique in identifying individuals with or at risk for CHD. The most promising use of these technologies is calcium scoring for risk assessment of the asymptomatic individual, whereby elevated calcium scores may trigger more vigorous application of both lifestyle and/or pharmacological therapies targeted to lower cardiovascular risk.”

We encourage you to learn more about how the EBT Coronary Calcium Score can provide your practice with an added measure of diagnostic accuracy with regard to coronary artery disease in at-risk patients.

For more information, please call 248-358-3225.

 

The Calcium Score: What does it mean?

 

Lung cancer survival rates improve with EBT lung screening

An October 2006 New England Journal of Medicine article concluded that annual CT screening in current and former smokers can detect lung cancer that is curable.

The study of more than 31,000 asymptomatic at-risk patients resulted in a diagnosis of lung cancer in 484 participants, 85% of whom were at clinical Stage I.

If patients wait for the symptoms of lung disease before getting checked out, the five-year survival rate is less than 12%. But when smokers are assessed with EBT before symptoms appear (according to research performed at the Mayo Clinic), that survival rate jumps to 90%.

The EBT lung scan is an FDA-approved, low-dose single breath hold screening. It is more sensitive than conventional chest X-ray, especially at identifying small lung nodules—when they are more likely to be confined to the chest and have not yet metastasized.

The ideal candidate for an EBT lung scan has:

Virtual Colonoscopy recommended as a primary
screening test before therapeutic Optical Colonoscopy

Highly anticipated trial results published in the October 4, 2007 edition of the New England Journal of Medicine [attached] marked the end of a long road to validation for virtual colonoscopy (VC or CT Colonography [CTC]). Preliminary results of the National CT Colonography Trial (ACRIN 6664), a study funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and performed on 2,531 participants in 15 U.S. centers, yielded an impressive per-patient sensitivity of 90% for adenomatous coldiameter, a sensitivity on par with that of optical colonoscopy.

The study was performed with a low-dose CT technique yielding a total dose of about 5mSv per exam, an amount the Health Physics Society considers a risk that is either nonexistent or too small to be measured.

Tens of millions of people eligible for colon cancer screening every year shy away from stool tests and the invasive colonoscopy exam.  Colon cancer is the second most common cancer killer in the U.S., affecting one in 18 individuals in the United States: 145,290 new cases in 2007, and an estimated 73,470 deaths. Yet only one-third to one-half of the 70 million people eligible to screen in the U.S. ever get tested.

The virtual imaging study had 90% sensitivity and 86% specificity for adenomas 1 cm or larger. Performance characteristics remained high in smaller sized polyps, with 84% sensitivity in lesions 7 mm or bigger. Specificity remained high (86% to 89%) across all relevant lesion sizes.

Sensitivity and specificity aside, the results also indicate most patients undergoing VC would not need subsequent colonoscopy, sparing them cost, risk and inconvenience of a second test.  Only 8.3% of trial participants would have proceeded to same-day optical colonoscopy for removal of polyps 6 mm or larger, a referral rate low enough to suggest that VC will not be too expensive an alternative for routine use in colorectal cancer screening.

The study concludes that: 1.) primary VC and OC screening strategies resulted in similar detection rates for advanced neoplasia, 2.) the numbers of polypectomies and complications were considerably smaller in the VC group, and 3.) the findings support the use of VC as a primary screening test before therapeutic OC.

Proposed guidelines for appropriateness of either CTC or OC are as follows:

Virtual Colonoscopy Routine surveillance after age 50 or earlier if family history Patients taking anticoagulants Difficult OC due to spastic bowels Suspect extra colonic disease. Failed OC		Optical Colonoscopy Prior polypectomy less than 5 years Suspect inflammatory bowel disease Rectal bleeding

 

 

 

 

 

 

EBT Heart & Body Imaging has been performing Virtual Colonoscopy in Michigan for since 200X, and our medical director, Dr. Marc Kahn has been a leading national proponent for its use as a viable alternative to enhance patient compliance for this important screening.

For more information, please call 248-358-3225.

 

Read the full New England Journal of Medicine article