Structured Abstract Background Multiple scoring systems have been devised to quantify angiographic coronary artery disease (CAD) burden, but it is unclear how these scores relate to each other and which scores are most accurate. The aim of this study was to compare coronary angiographic scoring systems 1) with each other and 2) with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) derived plaque burden in a population undergoing angiographic evaluation for CAD. Methods Coronary angiographic data from 3600 patients was scored using 10 commonly used angiographic scoring systems and inter-score correlations were calculated. In a subset of 50 patients, plaque burden and plaque area in the left anterior descending coronary artery was quantified using IVUS and correlated with angiographic scores. Results All angiographic scores correlated with each other (range for Spearman coefficient (ρ): 0.79-0.98, p<0.0001); the two most widely used scores, Gensini and CASS-70, had a ρ = 0.90, p<0.0001. All scores correlated significantly with average plaque burden and plaque area by IVUS (range ρ: 0.56-0.78, p<0.0001 and 0.43-0.62, p<0.01, respectively). The CASS-50 score had the strongest correlation (ρ: 0.78 and 0.62, p<0.0001) and the Duke Jeopardy score the weakest correlation (ρ: 0.56 and 0.43, p<0.01) with plaque burden and area, respectively. Conclusions Angiographic scoring systems are strongly correlated with each other and with atherosclerotic plaque burden. Scoring systems therefore appear to be a valid estimate of CAD plaque burden.

No abstract

No abstract

Integrated coronary revascularization using drug-eluting stents is feasible and safe. There are sufficient data to justify a randomized comparison of integrated coronary revascularization with standard coronary artery bypass grafting.

No abstract