I wrote lost month that cardiac CT scans were not ready for widespread use, citing the unacceptable false positive rate.
The specificity problem got a whole lot worse if this recent study is to be believed, says cardiologist Steven Nissen, who added “in more than 50% of subjects, CT angiography’detected’ coronary obstructions that simply were not there.”
False positives encourage more invasive testing that can expose patients to serious complications.
It’s further evidence arguing against the mainstream use of this wildly proliferating scan.
Related posts:
- Cardiac scans are not ready for prime time
- Why too many CT and MRI scans can be dangerous for patients
- Should infants be screened for heart defects with pulse oximetry?
- Healthy heart scan
- CT scans
- Angioplasty in a healthy patient, and why preventive heart care is dismissed
- Heart disease and women
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 1 comment }
Everything I have read about Cardiac CT seems to indicate that sensitivity and specificity are comparable to nuclear stress and that the radiation dose is less than nuclear. Why then does everyone think this test is worthless? Clearly using it as a screen in asymptomatic people is NOT appropriate, but I have not read anyone who legitimately promotes it for otherwise healthy people.
Comments on this entry are closed.