Heart Scan debate

A few years back when the book form of Track Your Plaque was first released, I did a bunch of radio and interviews to raise awareness of the book and of CT heart scanning in general.

I'd forgotten about this interview I did for National Public Radio (NPR), in which I debate Dr. Graboys from Harvard. Though I've had this debate countless other times, usually on a less formal basis, I didn't know what to expect at the start of the interview. After all, I knew of Dr. Graboys' reputation as a respected Harvard cardiologist. So I was expecting that at least he would argue that, being relatively new at the time, CT heart scanning was largely unproven in large clinical trials. (This was not entirely true then, however, as at least 1000 trials had already been performed, many of them involving thousands of participants. However, despite that much validation, the concept of CT heart scanning had still not entered the consciousness of most practicing physicians. After all, heart scanning is not part of the "crash and repair" equation that most have invested their career in.)

Heart Hawk re-discovered the debate, still on the NPR website. So here it is. When I re-listened to the debate, I was surprised at how little Dr. Graboys had to offer. He argues that examining left ventricular function should suffice as an important measure of mortality. In other words, if you have experienced a drop in the strength of heart muscle, that can be used to stratify your risk of death.

I tried to convey to the audience (NOT convince Dr. Graboys to believe, as most of my colleagues are stubbornly adherent to their way of thinking until someone tosses a big carrot in front of them) that CT heart scanning provides a means to detect coronary atherosclerosis years, even decades, before questions of mortality (death) became necessary. Heart scanning identifies disease in its early stages so that a program of prevention can be followed and tracked.

Dr. Graboys expressed concern that heart scanning devices could be mis-used to increase hospital procedures. He's absolutely right here. By that same line of thinking, say your crooked auto mechanic on the corner scams most of his customers by doing unnecessary car repairs. Does this mean that we should ban all auto mechanics from repairing cars? I hope not. I believe it does mean that we should all be educated on distinguishing scams from an honest businessman.

Same with heart scans. The key is not to ban heart scanning. We should try to educate the public and physicians to prevent these sorts of scams and decisions based on ignorance from occurring.

Nonetheless, make your own judgments.


CLICK HERE to listen (this is a .ram file so you will need the free RealPlayer to play)

Comments (4) -

  • JT

    7/29/2007 7:49:00 PM |

    you could have been a radio or TV personality!  Glad you became a cardiologist and author instead though.  

    Talking about debates, I occasionally visit the many different debating boards on the internet.  Recently I entered a debate with a couple UK medical students.  The topic was over which country provides the best medical care.  I asked if CT heart scans are being performed in the UK and they replied no and had not heard of this.  

    I don’t mean to catch you up into politics too much, but if you feel comfortable answering, a couple questions I have are: Do know if counties outside of America are planning to add CT heart scannings?  If so do you believe government run health care systems are more likely to implement their use nation wide since profit isn't as large of a motivation?

  • Dr. Davis

    7/30/2007 11:48:00 AM |

    Hi, JT--

    Interesting thoughts.

    There are a number of other countries that do provide CT heart scanning, though many have, from the start, confined their interest to CT angiography. Nearly all of the CT heart scanning for coronary calcification in the published literature originated in the U.S.

    It would indeed be an interesting social observation to know whether different medical systems encourage or discourage heart scanning. Sorry, but I know of no such correlation that has been formally examined.

  • Anonymous

    7/31/2007 2:18:00 AM |

    I recently took a calcium score test at my own expense because my insurance company does not cover the test. When I asked my insurance company why they don't cover it, they referred me to their web site at
    http://www.aetna.com/cpb/medical/data/200_299/0228.html

    Under the heading of Calcium Scoring, it says
    However, there is skepticism about the relationship between EBCT calcium scores and the likelihood of coronary events because of the following factors:
    - Calcium does not collect exclusively at sites with severe stenosis
    - EBCT calcium scores do not identify the location of specific vulnerable lesions
    - Substantial non-calcified plaque is frequently present in the absence of coronary artery calcification
    - There are no proven relationships between coronary artery calcification and the probability of plaque rupture.

    At the end it says: An assessment by the Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (Bardach, 2005) concluded: "Most consensus consider EBCT, SCT and MSCT still at their investigational stage for the following: a) detection of coronary artery calcifications as a screening method for asymptomatic subjects with coronary disease; b) detection of coronary artery calcifications in symptomatic patients; and c) assessment of coronary graft viability. No study reported that calcification measuring (plaque characterization) reduces the incidence of coronary events or death."

  • Dr. Davis

    7/31/2007 4:02:00 AM |

    So what else is new?

    Insurance companies are famous for finding every possible means to weasel out of paying for a test that leads to prevention of disease.

    Their fear: Opening the floodgates for all the people who might wish to have the test, a far larger number than those who eventually suffer cardiac catastrophes.

    This is patent nonsense. Anyone who has even begun to read the published experience in CT heart scanning, or has used CT scanning in real life practice, soon begins to realize the absolute folly of the conventional methods of heart disease detection: cholesterol (a miserable failure), stress testing (ask Bill Clinton how well it served him and the thousands of others who experienced heart attacks despite normal stress tests), or death. Take your pick.

Loading
High LDL cholesterol--only

High LDL cholesterol--only

As a sequel to my last post, just how often can we blame an isolated high LDL cholesterol as the cause of coronary plaque and a heart scan score?

In other words, how often does someone prove to have only LDL cholesterol as the cause of a heart scan score . . . and nothing else? No low HDL, small LDL, lipoprotein(a), a post-prandial (after-eating) intermediate-density lipoprotein, inflammatory responses, phospholipase A2, high triglycerides, vitamin D deficiency, etc.

Rarely. In fact, I can truly count the number of people who have only LDL cholesterol as their sole cause of coronary atherosclerotic plaque on one hand. It is really an infrequent situation.

Far more commonly, people have 5, 6, 7 or more reasons for coronary plaque.

Thus, the idea that a statin drug to reduce LDL will cure heart disease is completely folly. It does happen--but rarely. I think I've seen it happen twice. Much more commonly, a program that addresses all the causes of coronary plaque yields far superior benefits.

In my view, an effort to identify all the causes is relatively easy, makes far better sense, and provides you much greater assurance that you will succeed in conquering heart disease and removing its evil influence from your life.

Comments (3) -

  • Anonymous

    5/11/2007 7:21:00 PM |

    Dr. Davis, two things check out this web site http://www.traceminerals.com/research/synx.html it appears to have some good data on Metabolic Syndrome-X:
    I would like to share some good data that I have had by following the TYP program, I was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes Feb. 15 and after that I got my second heart scan, over 600 (my age 57) a 43% increase in 18 Mo. Not good needless to say, than I found TYP in march of this year I started slowly following and implementing a TYP plan,
    Background
    In February I did not feel well and I went to the doctor(2/15) I had lost 12 lbs my % body fat was going up  the muscles in my stomach were sore at times I was so thirsty I could not stand it and my eye site was changing. Needless to say I was diagnosed as a type II diabetic   glucose 344 A1C 11.2, was prescribed new medications for both the diabetic condition( Januvia 100mg 1X per day actoPlus Met 2X per day 15mg 850mg) along with cholesterol ( Advicor 20/1000 ). I started a life style changing program.
    Life style changes
    Modified eating program- went to a low GI high Vegetable protein including soy no or almost no Fats, eat as much as I want .(needless to say I have changed this plan)
    Quit smoking
    Increased exercise- walking on treadmill 7%grade 3.75mph from 30 min. to 30 min twice a day
    My Medications were changed Advicor 20/1000; Lisinopril-hydrochlorothiazide tablets 10-12.5 mg and a 325mg aspirin
    April started on the TYP plan, my Glucose average was way up, my total cholesterol number was 100 but my LDL-P was 1015 and my small LDL-P was 913 along with a HDL-C of 30  went on the TYP program
    Had my Vitamin D checked -it was low , had my DHEA checked it was low, had my Magnesium checked it was low, after my discussion with you came off Lisinopril , ( we are seeing were this settles out to pick the right med's) stopped talking all diabetic med's added two other supplements R-ALA , PGX Fiber Blend (instead of oatmeal too many carbs) along with Vit D, Magnesium, DHEA , 15 grams of soy protein Fish oil, healthy Fats, no wheat products, Dark chocolates L-Arginine.   I have had a additional blood test for these items (Vit D magnesium, DHEA) adjusted supplements body fat down to less than 14% WHAT A DIFFERENCE, in the last 11 days  my fasting glucose numbers are between 84 and 103 that’s normal, before they were above 125 solidly Diabetic (since Feb even with diabetic medications) my doctor has never seen this much improvement without medication, on someone that had a 12 week ave of over 340.I do not know who is more anxious to see my next lipid profile me or my doctor  . I'am scheduled in three weeks.
    Needless to say i also beleive that very few people can just take one pill and be cured. I hope i'am alive when they do find the magic cure (and i think they will) but right now the TYP plan is the best game in town. Eugene

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 3:12:33 PM |

    Thus, the idea that a statin drug to reduce LDL will cure heart disease is completely folly. It does happen--but rarely. I think I've seen it happen twice. Much more commonly, a program that addresses all the causes of coronary plaque yields far superior benefits.

  • viagra online

    4/19/2011 8:16:49 PM |

    I knoe a lot about the Cholesterol!
    LDL particles vary in size and density, and studies have shown that a pattern that has more small dense LDL particles, called Pattern B, equates to a higher risk factor for coronary heart disease!!My grandpa died for this reason, I think that it was terrible!!

Loading