Just found out my calcium score is 474. Next steps uncertain.

Posted by mikesto @mikesto, 4 days ago

Went to my primary care doctor complaining of light-headedness and slight pressure on the left side of my chest. Had the Cardio CT done and it came back at 474. Visited the cardiologist who I had seen about 15 months ago and she recommended Rosuvastatin. Long story but my PC had removed me from statins after I developed side effects. 15 months ago I had similar symptoms, which is why I went to the cardiologist. Took a stress test and passed with flying colors. Turns out the stress test does not indicate degree of blockage of the arteries. My calcium scores are: left main - 145.7; left anterior descending - 229.0; left circumflex - 63.6; right coronary artery - 35.4; posterior descending artery - 0. Now, I've seen much higher scores talked about here and bless you all for how you are handling it, but since I have some pressure and occasional light-headedness, I am freaked out a little. Cardiologist cannot test for the degree of blockage, probably an insurance thing, and she told me not to go all out while exercising. That concerns me too. I am active and have always watched my diet. I just climbed Angels Landing in Utah last month at 69 years old, That is a very strenuous hike. So the plan of care is low dose aspirin, Rosuvastatin, fish oil, and return in a month to see how my cholesterol is doing LDL - 146, Total 215. If I return with symptoms, she is leaning toward a procedure. I would like to know the degree of actual blockage before proceeding, but not sure how I will be able to find that out. Feedback appreciated and good luck to all in similar or more serious situations.

Interested in more discussions like this? Go to the Heart & Blood Health Support Group.

@rtchacko

Not sure how many of you have seen the following article that came out a couple of days ago,

I Was In Great Health. So Why Were My Arteries Clogged? - The Wall Street Journal https://apple.news/ABFBzMVx5TISLeuvU-YJ90w

I could copy and paste the article for those who do not have access to WSJ, but not sure if there is any legal implications for doing that.

I had been on the ideal diet recommended for cardiovascular health along with active life style for many years. I would love to get tested to rule out the condition described in the article. I need to work with my doctors next week and I do not know how much it will cost if my insurance will not cover the lab test.

Jump to this post

Can't read the article without a subscription, so maybe you can quickly summarize the main point?

REPLY

The article is about a person with very healthy life style discovering his very high CAC of 2750. He went to a lipidologist and upon extensive studies diagnosed him with a condition called, "Sitosterolemia, a hereditary disease that allowed the fatty parts of plants—the sterols and stanols—to enter my bloodstream. Most people process and excrete these substances into the GI tract. My body absorbs these plant sterols, which wind up as calcified plaque in my coronary arteries. " Per his doctor, “I see this frequently.” She suspects the disease might help explain why some young athletes die unexpectedly of heart attacks."
"the diet I had been prescribed was exactly the wrong diet for Sitosterolemia. The sterols and stanols that caused the calcium lining my arteries were in fact most common in the nuts and vegetables I had been feasting on for months. They are also found in high levels in canola oil and olive oil, the fats routinely recommended for heart patients." His doctor switched him to Zetia from Rosuvastatin. Each case is different

Since I am on a heart healthy diet for years with an active lifestyle and a high CAC, I am going to look into testing for Sitosterolemia. The insurance may not cover it. If I have the condition, I am on the wrong diet. At least I want to rule it out. Once you have a high CAC, nothing can reverse it, but I want to do what I can from this getting worse.

REPLY

I looked it up. Sitosterolemia is extremely rare. A few years ago, there were only 100 or so confirmed cases. I did read that it sometimes goes undiagnosed, and that it might affect 1 in 200,000 people. That's still very rare. Of course you can test to rule it out, but it's not something I'd be overly worried about.

REPLY
Please sign in or register to post a reply.