Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ksoze

(2,068 posts)
Tue Jan 16, 2018, 04:59 PM Jan 2018

He has mild coronary artery disease according to his calcium score

With a recent 133 score:

Coronary Calcium Score Interpretation
Based on a number of studies, the following definitions are used to relate the coronary artery calcium score to the extent of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease:

Coronary calcium score 0: No identifiable plaque. Risk of coronary artery disease very low (<5%)
Coronary calcium score 1-10: Mild identifiable plaque. Risk of coronary artery disease low (<10%)
Coronary calcium score 11-100: Definite, at least mild atherosclerotic plaque. Mild or minimal coronary narrowings likely.
Coronary calcium score 101-400: Definite, at least moderate atherosclerotic plaque. Mild coronary artery disease highly likely. Significant narrowings possible
Coronary calcium score > 400: Extensive atherosclerotic plaque. High likelihood of at least one significant coronary narrowing.

https://www.docsopinion.com/2014/08/19/coronary-calcium-score/

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
He has mild coronary artery disease according to his calcium score (Original Post) ksoze Jan 2018 OP
Way to go Pres. Turd! Super high score!!! You WIN!!!! lagomorph777 Jan 2018 #1
If it's true, it's not bad mitch96 Jan 2018 #2
LDL at 143 moondust Jan 2018 #3

lagomorph777

(30,613 posts)
1. Way to go Pres. Turd! Super high score!!! You WIN!!!!
Tue Jan 16, 2018, 05:03 PM
Jan 2018
Keep doing what you're doing and try to beat your high score next year!

I'm only a bit younger than Pres. Turd, and honestly not a great eater, but my score is ZERO. I think it takes quite a bit of abuse to boost the score that high.

mitch96

(13,911 posts)
2. If it's true, it's not bad
Tue Jan 16, 2018, 06:42 PM
Jan 2018

I use to do Calcium Scoring and like I said that's not a bad number.. Then again with his crappy diet I would expect something somewhere in the 1000 range or greater... Worst I ever saw was a 80 year old gent with a score of about 10,000. About an hour after the scan he was whisked off to the OR for a quad bypass.... he did not make it..
m

moondust

(19,992 posts)
3. LDL at 143
Tue Jan 16, 2018, 06:48 PM
Jan 2018

is up 52% since the last time his level (94) was made known (2 years ago?). "Healthy" is below 100.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»He has mild coronary arte...