ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024
Aortic Valve Calcium Score: Applications in Clinical Practice and Scientific Research-A Narrative Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence-based calcium scoring using 3D transesophageal echocardiography in aortic stenosis: a pilot study.Journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2026Article
- The potential role of sex related differences of the microbiome and its impact on calcific aortic stenosis: a narrative review.Biology of sex differences · 2026Review
- Assessment of Potential Predictors of Aortic Stenosis Severity Using ECG-Gated Multidetector CT in Patients with Bicuspid and Tricuspid Aortic Valves Prior to TAVI.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Increased Left Ventricular Myocardial Extracellular Volume Assessed by Cardiac Computed Tomography as a Consequence of Aortic Stenosis and Coexisting Cardiovascular Risk Factors.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Aortic valve assessment by cardiac tomography: application in clinical practice.Archivos peruanos de cardiologia y cirugia cardiovascularReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this narrative review, we investigate the essential role played by the computed tomography Aortic Valve Calcium Score (AVCS) in the cardiovascular diagnostic landscape, with a special focus on its implications for clinical practice and scientific research. Calcific aortic valve stenosis is the most prevalent type of aortic stenosis (AS) in industrialized countries, and due to the aging population, its prevalence is increasing. While transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) remains the gold standard, AVCS stands out as an essential complementary tool in evaluating patients with AS. The advantage of AVCS is its independence from flow; this allows for a more precise evaluation of patients with discordant findings in TTE. Further clinical applications of AVCS include in the assessment of patients before transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), as it helps in predicting outcomes and provides prognostic information post-TAVR. Additionally, we describe different AVCS thresholds regarding gender and the anatomical variations of the aortic valve. Finally, we discuss various scientific studies where AVCS was applied. As AVCS has some limitations, due to the pathophysiologies of AS extending beyond calcification and gender differences, scientists strive to validate contrast-enhanced AVCS. Furthermore, research on developing radiation-free methods of measuring calcium content is ongoing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.