| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cardiac Imaging |
1 From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, Campus Box 8131, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110. Received April 7, 2002; revision requested June 17; final revision received October 3; accepted October 23. Address correspondence to K.T.B. (e-mail: baet@mir.wustl.edu).
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of different thresholds and quantification methods on the accuracy and reproducibility of coronary calcium measurements with multi–detector row computed tomography (CT).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cardiac CT phantom containing predetermined calcified cylinders was scanned. Calcium volume and mass were measured at various threshold values ranging from 80 to 230 HU. In 32 patients, two consecutive CT scans were obtained, and the coronary artery calcium score, volume, and mass were measured by one observer at 130- and 90-HU thresholds. Correlation analysis and analysis of variance were performed to evaluate the measurement errors in the phantom study and the interscan variability in the clinical study.
RESULTS: In the phantom, mass measurement error varied with threshold and calcium density (P < .01). Mass error was strongly correlated with volume error (r = 0.91, P < .01) but with a much smaller range. In the clinical study, interscan variability of mass measurements was significantly lower than that with other measurement methods for both patients and individual vessels. For the patients, the mean interscan variability of calcium score, volume, and mass at the 130-HU threshold was 20.4%, 13.9%, and 9.3%, respectively. For all methods, interscan variability was not significantly different between the 130- and 90-HU thresholds (P > .05).
CONCLUSION: The mass measurement is more accurate, less variable, and more reproducible in coronary calcium quantification than are measurements with other algorithms. Accurate quantification of calcium in each calcified plaque may require that the threshold be set individually, depending on the calcium density.
© RSNA, 2003
Index terms: Computed tomography (CT), experimental studies, 54.12119 • Coronary vessels, calcification, 54.12119 • Coronary vessels, CT, 54.12119 • Phantoms
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. M. Kim, M. J. Chung, K. S. Lee, Y. H. Choe, C. A. Yi, and B.-K. Choe Coronary Calcium Screening Using Low-Dose Lung Cancer Screening: Effectiveness of MDCT with Retrospective Reconstruction Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2008; 190(4): 917 - 922. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Raman, B. Raman, S. Napel, and G. D. Rubin Semiautomated Quantification of the Mass and Distribution of Vascular Calcification with Multidetector CT: Method and Evaluation Radiology, April 1, 2008; 247(1): 241 - 250. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Rutten, I. Isgum, and M. Prokop Coronary Calcification: Effect of Small Variation of Scan Starting Position on Agatston, Volume, and Mass Scores Radiology, December 1, 2007; 246(1): 90 - 98. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. J. Budoff, S. Achenbach, R. S. Blumenthal, J. J. Carr, J. G. Goldin, P. Greenland, A. D. Guerci, J. A.C. Lima, D. J. Rader, G. D. Rubin, et al. Assessment of Coronary Artery Disease by Cardiac Computed Tomography: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, and Committee on Cardiac Imaging, Council on Clinical Cardiology Circulation, October 17, 2006; 114(16): 1761 - 1791. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. T. Boll, A. S. Bossert, A. J. Aschoff, M. H. Hoffmann, and R. C. Gilkeson Synergy of MDCT and Cine MRI for the Evaluation of Cardiac Motility Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2006; 186(6_Supplement_2): S379 - S386. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. E. Clouse, J. Chen, H. M. Krumholz, M. E. Clouse, J. Chen, and H. M. Krumholz Noninvasive Screening for Coronary Artery Disease With Computed Tomography Is Useful Circulation, January 3, 2006; 113(1): 125 - 146. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Moselewski, C. J. O'Donnell, S. Achenbach, M. Ferencik, J. Massaro, A. Nguyen, R. C. Cury, S. Abbara, I.-K. Jang, T. J. Brady, et al. Calcium Concentration of Individual Coronary Calcified Plaques as Measured by Multidetector Row Computed Tomography Circulation, June 21, 2005; 111(24): 3236 - 3241. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. S. Halliburton, A. E. Stillman, M. Lieber, J. M. Kasper, S. A. Kuzmiak, and R. D. White Potential Clinical Impact of Variability in the Measurement of Coronary Artery Calcification with Sequential MDCT Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2005; 184(2): 643 - 648. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Koos, A. H. Mahnken, A. M. Sinha, J. E. Wildberger, R. Hoffmann, and H. P. Kuhl Aortic Valve Calcification as a Marker for Aortic Stenosis Severity: Assessment on 16-MDCT Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2004; 183(6): 1813 - 1818. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Hong, T. K. Pilgram, F. Zhu, and K. T. Bae Coronary Artery Calcification: Effect of Size of Field of View on Multi-Detector Row CT Measurements Radiology, October 1, 2004; 233(1): 281 - 285. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. E. Hokanson, T. MacKenzie, G. Kinney, J. K. Snell-Bergeon, D. Dabelea, J. Ehrlich, R. H. Eckel, and M. Rewers Evaluating Changes in Coronary Artery Calcium: An Analytic Method That Accounts for Interscan Variability Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2004; 182(5): 1327 - 1332. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. Rumberger and L. Kaufman A Rosetta Stone for Coronary Calcium Risk Stratification: Agatston, Volume, and Mass Scores in 11,490 Individuals Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2003; 181(3): 743 - 748. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |
