Skip to content

The CAC score and the power of zero: the heart test that counts the disease, not just the risk

A coronary calcium scan counts the plaque you already have, and a zero lowers your estimated risk for years. It works best as a tie-breaker when your risk sits in the middle, not as a test for everyone, and it cannot see non-calcified plaque.

Updated 16 min read31 sources

The short answer

A coronary artery calcium (CAC) score of 0 means a low-dose heart CT found no calcified plaque, which lowers your estimated heart risk for years but not for life.[10, 1] The scan is most useful as a tie-breaker on the statin question for symptom-free adults of roughly 40 to 75 at borderline or intermediate risk.[5, 24] A zero is not zero risk, because the scan misses non-calcified plaque and does not cancel smoking, diabetes or high Lp(a).[8, 5, 26] A past zero never rules out a heart attack: new chest pain needs a doctor, sudden chest pain a 112 call.[29]

This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making changes to your diet, exercise routine, or supplement regimen.

What does a CAC score of 0 mean, and how long does a zero hold?

A CAC score counts the calcified plaque in the arteries that feed your heart, and a score of 0 means the scan found none. The number comes from a quick, low-dose CT scan without contrast dye and is calculated with the Agatston method, which dates back to 1990.[14] Most heart tests measure a risk factor such as cholesterol, blood pressure or age, while this one counts plaque that is already sitting in your arteries.

Finding none of that plaque is what cardiologists call the power of zero. In the large US MESA study, a CAC of 0 was the strongest of 13 markers tested that lowered estimated heart risk.[10] So a zero is a finding in its own right. It pushes your short- to medium-term risk estimate down instead of merely failing to find a problem. A zero is still not zero risk, because it says nothing about non-calcified plaque, smoking or diabetes.

A zero also does not stay true forever. In MESA, about 1 in 4 people who started at zero showed new calcium within roughly 3 to 7 years.[1] The researchers called this span the "warranty period" of a zero, and it varied by sex and ethnicity and was shorter with diabetes.[1] Most of the new calcium came in small amounts, since after ten years only about 8 percent had passed a score of 100.[1]

That warranty is a modelled interval, not a guarantee. About 1 in 5 of the coronary events in people who started at zero came before a rescan at 3 to 5 years would have been due.[1] Survival held up longer than the calcium clock, though. A separate study followed symptom-free people with a zero for almost 15 years.[15] In those at low or intermediate risk, deaths from any cause stayed below 1 percent a year.[15] That is a survival benchmark, not a promise that no heart event will happen.

For the next scan, the 2026 US guideline rates a repeat 3 to 7 years after a zero as reasonable if you hold off on a statin and have none of its higher-risk conditions, such as diabetes after 40, smoking, an LDL above 190 mg/dL or early heart disease in the family.[20, 24] The MESA authors suggest picking the point within that range by age, sex and risk profile, with diabetes pointing to the shorter end.[1] Yearly rescans rarely add useful information, but they do add radiation.

What does a high CAC score mean for statins and LDL goals?

A high CAC score pushes your estimated risk sharply up, and that is the main way the scan changes treatment. The score is read in bands, and each band pointed the 2018 US cholesterol guideline toward a different statin decision.[5]:

CAC score What it means What the 2018 US guideline did with it
0 No calcified plaque found Holding off on a statin was reasonable, except with diabetes, smoking or early heart disease in the family[5]
1 to 99 Some plaque Favored a statin, especially from age 55[5]
100 or more, or at or above the 75th percentile for your age and sex Clearly raised Statin indicated[5]
1000 or more Very high Statin indicated[5]; MESA later found event rates close to people who already had a heart attack or stroke[2]

The percentile in the table compares you with people of your age and sex, so the 75th means more calcium than about three in four of them[5] Even the lowest band counts. In MESA, a CAC of 1 to 10 came with about three times the coronary risk of a zero, though the absolute risk stayed very low.[28] Very low values can vary between scans, so ask the radiologist whether a tiny score is a clear finding. Then read it next to your age percentile and other risk factors.[5]

At the far end of the scale, a CAC of 1000 or more carried several times the cardiovascular risk of a zero in MESA.[2] That held even after accounting for the usual risk factors. At a score of 1000, the study's model estimated about 3.4 major cardiovascular events per 100 person-years.[2] Person-years add up the time each participant was followed, so that is roughly 3.4 heart attacks, strokes or cardiovascular deaths for every 100 people per year. That rate was similar to the one in statin-treated patients from a large trial who had already had a heart attack or stroke.[2] So a scan can place someone without a single symptom in that risk group.

The score matters this much because statins pay off most where calcium already is. A MESA analysis estimated that payoff by applying the benefit seen in statin trials to the event rates at each calcium level.[4] Over 10 years, about 87 people with a CAC of 0 would need a statin to prevent one cardiovascular event, against about 19 with a CAC above 100.[4]

That gap also works the other way, because many people flagged for a statin have no calcium at all. In MESA, 41 percent of the people the 2013 US guideline marked for a statin had a CAC of 0.[3] Most of them qualified because of their calculated 10-year risk.[3] Their event rate was low, about 5 per 1,000 people a year, so the scan showed many of them a lower risk than the calculator had.[3] A 2026 MESA analysis puts a limit on that relief. For people who already cleared the treatment line on risk alone, heart events stayed higher even at a CAC of 0.[21] A zero should therefore not generally cancel their statin.

The newest US guideline builds the score into treatment goals. The 2026 ACC/AHA dyslipidemia guideline gives CAC scoring its strongest recommendation for adults at borderline or intermediate risk.[20, 24, 25] It uses the score to sharpen their risk estimate and guide the treatment decision, reading it against age and sex. Most bands then get their own goal for LDL cholesterol (the "bad" cholesterol on your blood test, measured in mg/dL), roughly as follows (as of October 2026):

CAC score LDL goal in the 2026 US guideline
1 to 99, below the 75th percentile Below 100 mg/dL
100 to 299, or at or above the 75th percentile Below 70 mg/dL, and at least 50 percent lower
300 to 999 Below 70 mg/dL, and at least 50 percent lower; below 55 mg/dL is an option
1000 or more Below 55 mg/dL, and at least 50 percent lower than before treatment

Source: 2026 ACC/AHA guideline,[20] also summarised in reviews.[26, 27]

These goals rest mainly on observational risk estimates from studies that followed people over time, not on trials that compared CAC-guided targets head to head.[27]

Europe has moved in the same direction. The 2025 ESC/EAS update on lipid treatment speaks to people at moderate risk or near a treatment threshold.[23] For them, a raised calcium score, if one was measured, should be considered as a reason to rate their risk higher.[23] Germany's Heinz Nixdorf Recall study supports that role, since it found that CAC sharpened risk assessment beyond earlier European and US statin advice.[12] If you already take a statin, though, the update advises reading a new score with caution.[23]

Who should get a CAC scan, and who should skip it?

A CAC scan works best as a tie-breaker, not as a routine check-up. Neither the US nor the European guidelines recommend it as screening for everyone.[27] Its sweet spot is narrow: no symptoms, an age of roughly 40 to 75, borderline or intermediate risk, and a statin question you and your doctor cannot settle.[5] In that spot the score can move the decision either way. That is why the 2018 US guideline framed it as shared decision-making, something you and your doctor decide together.[5]

What counts as borderline or intermediate depends on the risk calculator your doctor uses. The 2026 US guideline switched to the newer PREVENT calculator.[20] On that scale, a 2026 MESA analysis put the middle zone at a 10-year risk of about 3 to under 10 percent.[21] The older calculator behind the 2018 guideline set the band higher, at around 5 to 20 percent.[5] Whatever the scale, the MESA analysis found that CAC helped most exactly when the statin call was uncertain.[21]

Outside that zone, a good doctor will often talk you out of the scan:

  • Already at high risk? You need treatment whatever the score says, so the scan rarely changes the plan.
  • Young and truly at low risk? Your chance of a problem is already so small that the scan mostly buys you a bill and a little radiation, with no decision riding on it.
  • Having symptoms like chest pain, pressure or breathlessness? Then this is not a screening question. Sudden or lasting chest pain, especially pain spreading to the arm, back, neck or upper belly, is an emergency: call 112, whatever an earlier scan said.[29] For symptoms that come and go, your doctor first assesses your risk and then decides whether you need a test at all and which one.[31] At low risk that can be a calcium score, but at higher risk it is usually a CT angiography or a stress test, which look for real narrowings and poor blood flow rather than calcium alone.[31]

Even within the sweet spot, some risk factors override a perfect zero. The 2018 guideline's rule to hold the statin at a zero did not apply to people with diabetes, current smokers or anyone with early heart disease in the family.[5] The guideline treats those risks as strong enough to act on without visible calcium, so a smoker with diabetes and a zero is not off the hook.

If you do sit in the sweet spot, the scan is worth most when you know beforehand what each result would change. A reasonable step is to agree with your doctor what you would do at a zero, at a small score and at 100 or more. If all three answers come out the same, the scan has nothing left to decide.

How does a CAC scan work, and how much radiation does it involve?

A CAC scan is a quick heart CT without contrast dye, and the whole thing is almost boring, which is exactly what you want from a medical test. You lie down, a few electrodes go on your chest, and the scanner takes images timed to your heartbeat. No iodine dye is needed for the score, so there is no IV line and no worry about a dye allergy. A computer then turns the images into your Agatston score.

The radiation dose is low, at around 1 mSv (millisievert, the unit for the radiation dose your body takes up).[13] Across the scanners used in MESA, the average was about 1.05 mSv.[13] An older modelling study that compared many scan protocols found a much wider range, from 0.8 to 10.5 mSv.[7] Most of that spread came from scan settings, such as a higher tube current or scanning across the whole heartbeat instead of one phase of it.[7]

Current low-dose protocols sit at the low end of that range,[13] which is low but not nothing. Small as it is, the dose still counts when scans repeat. After a zero, the 2026 US guideline rates a new scan 3 to 7 years later as reasonable if you hold off on a statin and have no higher-risk condition such as diabetes after 40 or smoking.[20, 24] MESA points to the shorter end for people with diabetes,[1] while yearly scans add radiation and rarely change anything.

Radiation is not the only thing to settle before you book. If you are or might be pregnant, say so. Radiation exposure in pregnancy is checked especially critically, and the scan is usually postponed or replaced by a method without radiation.[30] The scan also covers part of your chest, so it can turn up unrelated incidental findings. A positive score, in turn, can lead to more tests and long-term medication. Reviews of the 2026 US guideline list cost, radiation and incidental findings as things to weigh before testing.[27] So before booking, ask the practice which low-dose protocol it uses, and decide with your doctor what you would do with the result.

What does a calcium score cost in Germany, Austria and Switzerland, and does insurance pay?

In Germany, a calcium score scan without symptoms is a self-pay service. Practices offer it as an IGeL (Individuelle Gesundheitsleistung, a self-pay extra), which statutory health insurance (GKV) does not cover. The IGeL-Monitor, the Medizinischer Dienst's website on self-pay services, puts the CT itself at 135 to 380 EUR, depending on the fee rate.[17] That price is as of October 2026, and consultation and the written report can come on top.[17] Ask for the full price in writing before you book.

Insurance does not pay because of one word: symptoms. Since January 2024, statutory insurance covers CT coronary angiography, a heart CT with contrast dye, for people with suspected chronic coronary heart disease.[18] The G-BA, the body that decides what statutory insurance pays for, made that decision for people with symptoms. The IGeL-Monitor stresses that it does not cover heart CT as an early-detection check for people who feel fine.[17]

Germany also has a legal catch. Under German radiation protection law, a CT used purely for early detection in people without symptoms needs its own federal regulation.[17] So far only low-dose lung-cancer screening has one, for heavy current and former smokers aged 50 to 75.[17] It has been in force since July 2024, and statutory insurance has paid for it since April 2026.[17] No such regulation exists for the heart. That is why the IGeL-Monitor says CT early detection of narrowed heart arteries is not legally permitted, even though practices still offer it.[17] Before you book, ask your doctor why the scan is medically justified for you in particular.

That legal point applies to Germany only. For Austria and Switzerland we found no official source on paying for a calcium score without symptoms. A scan without a medical reason is often a private, self-pay workup, in Austria for example through a Wahlarzt, a doctor outside the public contract system. In Switzerland, cover for check-ups depends on the policy, so ask about both your basic insurance and any supplementary policy. Wherever you live, get your insurer's answer and the practice's full out-of-pocket price in writing before the appointment.

What can a zero miss, and how do ApoB and Lp(a) fit in?

A CAC scan has one limit to understand before you trust a zero: it sees only calcified plaque. It cannot see non-calcified ("soft") plaque, including the fatty, low-density kind.[9] In the SCOT-HEART trial, that kind predicted heart attacks beyond what the calcium score and the degree of narrowing showed.[9] So a zero can sit next to real disease.

How often that happens has been measured in people with chest symptoms. In SCOT-HEART, 16 percent of patients with a CAC of 0 still had plaque on a CT angiogram, a contrast-dye CT that also shows non-calcified plaque.[8] Most of that plaque was small and did not narrow the artery much. Even so, about 1 in 10 of the trial's heart attacks happened in someone with a zero.[8] The authors' verdict was a good but not perfect prognosis.

A zero also rules out a narrowing less well the younger the patient. In a Danish registry of people with chest symptoms, narrowings were rare under 40.[19] Yet more than half of the young patients who did have one scored a CAC of 0, against 5 percent of those aged 70 or older.[19] A smaller matched study, ICONIC, shows the same limit from another angle. Almost a quarter of its patients with chest symptoms who later had a heart attack or unstable angina had scored 0, though that group was small.[16] Symptom-free middle-aged adults, the group the scan is meant for, are where the evidence for a reassuring zero is strongest.[10]

What the scan cannot see, two blood tests partly cover. CAC is the plaque you have already built; ApoB and Lp(a) are lifelong drivers that build it. ApoB counts every artery-clogging cholesterol particle in your blood. Lp(a), said "L-P-little-a", is a cholesterol particle largely set by your genes, so one measurement in adult life is usually enough. Both the 2025 European lipid update and the 2026 US guideline advise measuring it at least once.[23, 20]

Lp(a) and the calcium score add to each other rather than overlap. An analysis of MESA and the Dallas Heart Study found that each predicted heart-disease risk on its own.[11] In MESA, people with Lp(a) in the top fifth but a CAC of 0 did not show a clearly higher risk than people with neither, over about 13 years.[11] That estimate was imprecise, though, and the real danger showed up when high Lp(a) met a CAC of 100 or more.[11] A zero may lower near-term risk, but it does not cancel a lifelong, inherited Lp(a) burden, especially in younger people.[26] With high Lp(a), a zero is a reason to recheck later, not to stop paying attention.

All of these numbers describe risk, and none of them shows that scanning itself prevents heart attacks. Randomised trials of CAC screening, pooled in a 2025 review, led to somewhat better blood pressure and cholesterol control.[22] They were too small or too short to show fewer heart attacks or deaths.[22] Settling that would take a trial large and long enough to count those events.

A reasonable order follows from this. Start with ApoB and Lp(a), which need a blood sample rather than a CT, and in the case of Lp(a) usually only once. If the statin decision is still open after those results, a calcium scan is the tie-breaker worth discussing with your doctor. Read any zero it shows next to those blood results and next to smoking, diabetes or high blood pressure, which a zero never erases.

Frequently asked questions

What is a good CAC score for my age?

Zero is the score you want at any age, because it means no calcified plaque turned up, and it is one of the strongest signs of low risk known.[10] Above zero, your result is read against people of your age and sex: a score counts as high at 100 or more, or at or above the 75th percentile for your age and sex.[5] That is why the same positive number is more worrying in a young person than in someone much older, since the plaque formed earlier.

Is a coronary calcium score worth it?

It is worth it in one specific spot: you have no symptoms, you are roughly 40 to 75, you sit at borderline or intermediate risk, and you cannot decide about starting a statin.[5] There the score changes the expected benefit of a statin a lot,[4] and the 2026 US guideline gives CAC its strongest grade for exactly this group.[20, 24] If your treatment plan is already clear, it adds little. If you have symptoms, see a doctor instead of booking a calcium scan, and call 112 for sudden chest pain.[29]

Can a CAC score of zero be wrong or miss a heart attack risk?

Yes, because CAC only catches calcified plaque, not the non-calcified kind. In SCOT-HEART, 16 percent of patients with symptoms and a CAC of 0 still had plaque on a CT angiogram, mostly small, and the authors called the prognosis good but not perfect.[8] Among people with symptoms, a zero misses more narrowings in younger patients[19]; the reassuring evidence comes mainly from symptom-free adults.[10] A zero also does not switch off smoking, diabetes or high Lp(a) as lifelong drivers.[5, 26]

Can you have high cholesterol and a zero calcium score?

Yes. A zero only means no calcified plaque yet, and many people with raised cholesterol or risk have one. In MESA, 41 percent of people for whom the 2013 US guideline recommended a statin, mostly because of their calculated 10-year risk, had a CAC of 0.[3] Under the 2018 US guideline, an LDL of 190 mg/dL or higher meant a statin whatever the score, while between 70 and 189 mg/dL a zero made waiting reasonable unless you have diabetes, smoke or have early heart disease in the family.[5] A 2026 MESA analysis adds that if your overall risk already clears the treatment line, a zero should not generally cancel the statin.[21]

How long is a zero calcium score good for?

MESA modelled the time until about 1 in 4 people with a zero show new calcium at roughly 3 to 7 years, depending on sex and ethnicity, and shorter with diabetes.[1] That is not a guarantee: about 1 in 5 coronary events in people who started at zero happened before a rescan at 3 to 5 years would have taken place.[1] The 2026 US guideline rates a repeat scan 3 to 7 years after a zero as reasonable if you hold off on a statin and have no higher-risk condition such as diabetes after 40 or smoking.[20, 24] For survival, deaths from any cause stayed under 1 percent a year for almost 15 years in symptom-free people with a zero at low or intermediate risk.[15]

What is a bad CAC score?

A score of 1 to 99 shows some plaque, while 100 or more, or at or above the 75th percentile for your age and sex, counts as clearly raised, and the 2018 US guideline treated that as a reason for a statin.[5] A score of 1000 or more is very high: in MESA its yearly event rate was similar to that of statin-treated patients who had already had a heart attack or stroke.[2] Any score above 0 at a young age deserves a closer look, because that plaque formed early.

Does a high CAC score mean I need a statin?

A high score strongly tips the decision toward treatment, because statins pay off most where calcium already is. In MESA, a CAC of 1000 or more carried several times the cardiovascular risk of a zero, and its yearly event rate was similar to that of statin-treated patients who had already had a heart attack or stroke.[2] A MESA analysis estimated that over 10 years about 19 people with a CAC above 100 would need a statin to prevent one cardiovascular event, against about 87 with a CAC of 0.[4] The 2026 US guideline ties LDL goals to the score, down to below 55 mg/dL from a CAC of 1000,[20, 26, 27] but the final call stays a shared decision with your doctor that also weighs your LDL, ApoB and other risks.[5]

How much does a coronary calcium scan cost in Germany?

For symptom-free screening, practices sell it as a self-pay IGeL service, and the IGeL-Monitor puts the CT itself at 135 to 380 EUR depending on the fee rate, with consultation and report possibly on top (as of October 2026).[17] Statutory insurance (GKV) does not pay, because the G-BA's 2024 decision covers CT angiography for suspected chronic coronary heart disease, not early detection in people without symptoms.[18, 17] The IGeL-Monitor even calls CT early detection of the heart arteries not legally permitted, because the needed radiation-protection regulation does not exist.[17] In Austria and Switzerland, ask your insurer first; without a medical reason you will often pay yourself.

Should I get a CAC scan or test ApoB and Lp(a) first?

They answer different questions, so they work best together rather than as alternatives. ApoB and Lp(a) are blood tests that capture lifelong drivers of plaque, and both the 2025 European lipid update and the 2026 US guideline advise measuring Lp(a) at least once in adult life.[23, 20] CAC shows the calcified plaque you have already built, and the two predict risk independently of each other.[11] So the blood tests are a sensible place to start, and CAC earns its place when the statin decision stays open.

What should I do if I get chest pain after a zero calcium score?

Treat it as new: sudden or lasting chest pain, especially pain spreading to the arm, back, neck or upper belly, is an emergency, so call 112 whatever an earlier scan said.[29] A past zero does not rule out a heart attack, because in a small matched study of people with chest symptoms, 23 percent of those who later had a heart attack or unstable angina had a CAC of 0.[16] Among younger people with symptoms, a zero also misses more narrowings.[19] For chest symptoms that come and go, see a doctor, who assesses your risk and then decides whether you need a test such as CT angiography or a stress test.[31]

Sources31

  1. Dzaye O, Dardari ZA, Cainzos-Achirica M, Blankstein R, Agatston AS, Duebgen M, Yeboah J, Szklo M, Budoff MJ, Lima JAC, Blumenthal RS, Nasir K, Blaha MJ. (2021). Warranty Period of a Calcium Score of Zero: Comprehensive Analysis From the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). JACC: Cardiovascular Imagingdoi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2020.06.048
  2. Peng AW, Dardari ZA, Blumenthal RS, Dzaye O, Obisesan OH, Iftekhar Uddin SM, Nasir K, Blankstein R, Budoff MJ, Mortensen MB, Joshi PH, Page J, Blaha MJ. (2021). Very High Coronary Artery Calcium (≥1000) and Association With Cardiovascular Disease Events, Non–Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes, and Mortality: Results From MESA. Circulationdoi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.050545
  3. Nasir K, Bittencourt MS, Blaha MJ, Blankstein R, Agatston AS, Rivera JJ, Miedema MD, Sibley CT, Shaw LJ, Blumenthal RS, Budoff MJ, et al. (2015). Implications of Coronary Artery Calcium Testing Among Statin Candidates According to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Cholesterol Management Guidelines: MESA. Journal of the American College of Cardiologydoi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.07.066
  4. Mortensen MB, Falk E, Li D, Nasir K, Blaha MJ, Sandfort V, Rodriguez CJ, Ouyang P, Budoff M, et al. (2018). Statin Trials, Cardiovascular Events, and Coronary Artery Calcification: Implications for a Trial-Based Approach to Statin Therapy in MESA. JACC: Cardiovascular Imagingdoi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.01.029
  5. Grundy SM, Stone NJ, Bailey AL, Beam C, Birtcher KK, Blumenthal RS, et al. (2019). 2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol. Circulationdoi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000625
  6. Visseren FLJ, Mach F, Smulders YM, Carballo D, Koskinas KC, Bäck M, et al. (2021). 2021 ESC Guidelines on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice. European Heart Journaldoi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehab484
  7. Kim KP, Einstein AJ, Berrington de González A. (2009). Coronary Artery Calcification Screening: Estimated Radiation Dose and Cancer Risk. Archives of Internal Medicinedoi:10.1001/archinternmed.2009.162
  8. Osborne-Grinter M, Kwiecinski J, Doris M, McElhinney P, Cadet S, Adamson PD, Williams MC, Dweck MR, Newby DE, Dey D, Slomka PJ, et al. (2022). Association of Coronary Artery Calcium Score With Qualitatively and Quantitatively Assessed Adverse Plaque on Coronary CT Angiography in the SCOT-HEART Trial. European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imagingdoi:10.1093/ehjci/jeab135
  9. Williams MC, Kwiecinski J, Doris M, McElhinney P, D'Souza MS, Cadet S, Adamson PD, Moss AJ, Newby DE, Dweck MR, Dey D, Slomka PJ, et al. (2020). Low-Attenuation Noncalcified Plaque on Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Predicts Myocardial Infarction: Results From the Multicenter SCOT-HEART Trial. Circulationdoi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.044720
  10. Blaha MJ, Cainzos-Achirica M, Greenland P, McEvoy JW, Blankstein R, Budoff MJ, et al. (2016). Role of Coronary Artery Calcium Score of Zero and Other Negative Risk Markers for Cardiovascular Disease: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Circulationdoi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.018524
  11. Mehta A, Vasquez N, Ayers CR, Patel J, Hooda A, Khera A, et al. (2022). Independent Association of Lipoprotein(a) and Coronary Artery Calcification With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis and the Dallas Heart Study. Journal of the American College of Cardiologydoi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.11.058
  12. Mahabadi AA, Mohlenkamp S, Lehmann N, Kalsch H, Dykun I, Pundt N, et al. (Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study). (2017). CAC Score Improves Coronary and CV Risk Assessment Above Statin Indication by ESC and AHA/ACC Primary Prevention Guidelines. JACC: Cardiovascular Imagingdoi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2016.03.022
  13. Messenger B, Li D, Nasir K, Carr JJ, Blankstein R, Budoff MJ. (2016). Coronary calcium scans and radiation exposure in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imagingdoi:10.1007/s10554-015-0799-3
  14. Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hildner FJ, Zusmer NR, Viamonte M, Detrano R. (1990). Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. Journal of the American College of Cardiologydoi:10.1016/0735-1097(90)90282-T
  15. Valenti V, ó Hartaigh B, Heo R, Cho I, Schulman-Marcus J, Gransar H, et al. (Min JK senior). (2015). A 15-year warranty period for asymptomatic individuals without coronary artery calcium: a prospective follow-up of 9715 individuals. JACC: Cardiovascular Imagingdoi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2015.01.025
  16. Rebecca A. Jonas, et al. (ICONIC investigators). (2025). CTA-Derived Plaque Characteristics and Risk of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients With Coronary Artery Calcium Score of Zero: Insights From the ICONIC Trial. American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR)doi:10.2214/AJR.24.31476
  17. Medizinischer Dienst Bund (IGeL-Monitor). (2026). Computertomographie (CT) zur Früherkennung von Krankheitenigel-monitor.de
  18. Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss (G-BA). (2024). Neue ambulante Leistung: Bildgebendes Verfahren zum Abklären von koronarer Herzkrankheitg-ba.de
  19. Mortensen MB, Gaur S, Frimmer A, Bøtker HE, Sørensen HT, Kragholm KH, et al. (2022). Association of Age With the Diagnostic Value of Coronary Artery Calcium Score for Ruling Out Coronary Stenosis in Symptomatic Patients. JAMA Cardiologydoi:10.1001/jamacardio.2021.4406
  20. Blumenthal RS, Morris PB, Gaudino M, Johnson HM, et al. (2026). 2026 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Dyslipidemia. Journal of the American College of Cardiologydoi:10.1016/j.jacc.2025.11.016
  21. Rikhi R, Chen H, Mirzai S, Bhatia HS, et al., Shapiro MD. (2026). The Role of Coronary Artery Calcium in Statin Eligibility Based on the American Heart Association's PREVENT Calculator: Insights From MESA. Journal of the American College of Cardiologydoi:10.1016/j.jacc.2026.05.039
  22. Scheu V, Alwan L, Gräni C, Gencer B, Rodondi N, Blum MR. (2025). Coronary atherosclerosis screening in asymptomatic adults using coronary artery calcium for cardiovascular prevention: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials and prospective cohorts. BMJ Opendoi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-101472
  23. Mach F, Koskinas KC, Roeters van Lennep JE, Tokgözoğlu L, Badimon L, Baigent C, et al. (2025). 2025 Focused Update of the 2019 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias. European Heart Journaldoi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf190
  24. Dzaye O, Blaha MJ, Razavi AC. (2026). Is there a role for measuring coronary artery calcium progression in 2026? American Journal of Preventive Cardiologydoi:10.1016/j.ajpc.2026.101557
  25. Irannejad K, Mora R, Krishnan S, Lakshmanan S, Roy S, Budoff MJ. (2026). Coronary Artery Calcium in ACC/AHA Prevention Guidelines: Evolution From 2007 to 2026. JACC: Cardiovascular Imagingdoi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2026.07.014
  26. Syed AB, Michalak S, Potulapati IKR, Vignarajah, Shah, et al. (2026). Lipoprotein(a) in Personalized Cardiovascular Prevention: Risk Stratification, Coronary Artery Calcium, and Emerging Lp(a)-Lowering Therapies. Journal of Clinical Medicinedoi:10.3390/jcm15176640
  27. Sabouret P, Mafrica D, Giamundo DM, Kalisz, Asher, Atar, et al. (2026). The 2026 ACC/AHA Dyslipidemia Guideline: A Critical and Transatlantic Perspective on Personalized Lipid Management. Life (Basel)doi:10.3390/life16091470
  28. Budoff MJ, McClelland RL, Nasir K, Greenland P, Kronmal RA, Kondos GT, et al. (2009). Cardiovascular events with absent or minimal coronary calcification: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). American Heart Journaldoi:10.1016/j.ahj.2009.08.007
  29. Bundesministerium für Gesundheit (gesund.bund.de, with IQWiG). (2020). Herzinfarkt: Ursachen, Behandlung, Rehabilitationgesund.bund.de
  30. Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz (BfS). (2021). Strahlenanwendungen und Schwangerschaftbfs.de
  31. Gulati M, Levy PD, Mukherjee D, Amsterdam E, Bhatt DL, Birtcher KK, et al. (2021). 2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain. Journal of the American College of Cardiologydoi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.07.053

Bring your heart numbers to people who get them

Wondering whether a CAC scan, ApoB, or Lp(a) test is worth it for you? Join Longevity Cities across the DACH region to compare notes, find evidence-based clinicians, and make the statin decision with data instead of guesswork.

Join Longevity Cities

Experts in this field

Speakers from the Longevity Cities community on this topic

Related guides

Created by Maurice Lichtenberg, Founder, Longevity Cities

The information provided here is for educational purposes only. Longevity Cities does not provide medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of qualified healthcare providers with questions regarding medical conditions.