Cargando…

Relative predictive value of lung cancer screening CT versus myocardial perfusion attenuation correction CT in the evaluation of coronary calcium

Coronary artery calcium scores (CACS) from lung cancer screening computed tomography (LCSCT) or myocardial perfusion attenuation correction computed tomography (ACCT) are not routinely performed or reported. CACS from LCSCT and ACCT have not been directly compared in the same patient population. We...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bailey, Grant, Healy, Abigail, Young, Bryan D., Sharma, Esseim, Meadows, Judith, Chun, Hyung J., Wu, Wen-Chih, Choudhary, Gaurav, Morrison, Alan R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5402939/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28437443
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175678
_version_ 1783231329730560000
author Bailey, Grant
Healy, Abigail
Young, Bryan D.
Sharma, Esseim
Meadows, Judith
Chun, Hyung J.
Wu, Wen-Chih
Choudhary, Gaurav
Morrison, Alan R.
author_facet Bailey, Grant
Healy, Abigail
Young, Bryan D.
Sharma, Esseim
Meadows, Judith
Chun, Hyung J.
Wu, Wen-Chih
Choudhary, Gaurav
Morrison, Alan R.
author_sort Bailey, Grant
collection PubMed
description Coronary artery calcium scores (CACS) from lung cancer screening computed tomography (LCSCT) or myocardial perfusion attenuation correction computed tomography (ACCT) are not routinely performed or reported. CACS from LCSCT and ACCT have not been directly compared in the same patient population. We identified 66 patients who underwent both LCSCT (non-gated) and ECG-gated cardiac CT (CCT) within a 2-year span. Of this population, 40 subjects had also undergone ACCT. Using the Agatston method, CACS for 264 individual vessels from the LCSCT population and for 160 vessels from ACCT population were calculated and evaluated for agreement with ECG-gated CCT as the gold standard. Secondary analysis included a comparison of individual vessel contribution to variations in agreement and a comparison of total CACS from CCT, LCSCT, and ACCT for respective MACE prediction. CACS from LCSCT demonstrated a strong Pearson correlation, r = 0.9017 (0.876–0.9223), with good agreement when compared to CACS from CCT. CACS from ACCT demonstrated a significantly (P < 0.00001) weaker correlation, r = 0.5593 (0.4401–0.6592). On an individual vessel basis, CACS from all major vessels (LM, LAD, LCX, and RCA) contributed to the weaker correlation. For total vessel CACS, LCSCT demonstrated comparable area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (LCSCT AUC = 0.8133 and CCT AUC = 0.8302, P = 0.691) for prediction of MACE. Although ACCT demonstrated a similar AUC (ACCT AUC = 0.7969, P = 0.662) for MACE prediction the cutoff value for elevated risk was extremely low. In conclusion, LCSCT outperformed ACCT at calcium scoring by providing better agreement and comparable risk assessment to CCT despite the absence of ECG-gating. It is therefore reasonable to use LCSCT images to derive and report Agatston-based CACS for cardiovascular risk assessment, whereas the use of ACCT images to report Agatston-based CACS is not currently practical.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5402939
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54029392017-05-12 Relative predictive value of lung cancer screening CT versus myocardial perfusion attenuation correction CT in the evaluation of coronary calcium Bailey, Grant Healy, Abigail Young, Bryan D. Sharma, Esseim Meadows, Judith Chun, Hyung J. Wu, Wen-Chih Choudhary, Gaurav Morrison, Alan R. PLoS One Research Article Coronary artery calcium scores (CACS) from lung cancer screening computed tomography (LCSCT) or myocardial perfusion attenuation correction computed tomography (ACCT) are not routinely performed or reported. CACS from LCSCT and ACCT have not been directly compared in the same patient population. We identified 66 patients who underwent both LCSCT (non-gated) and ECG-gated cardiac CT (CCT) within a 2-year span. Of this population, 40 subjects had also undergone ACCT. Using the Agatston method, CACS for 264 individual vessels from the LCSCT population and for 160 vessels from ACCT population were calculated and evaluated for agreement with ECG-gated CCT as the gold standard. Secondary analysis included a comparison of individual vessel contribution to variations in agreement and a comparison of total CACS from CCT, LCSCT, and ACCT for respective MACE prediction. CACS from LCSCT demonstrated a strong Pearson correlation, r = 0.9017 (0.876–0.9223), with good agreement when compared to CACS from CCT. CACS from ACCT demonstrated a significantly (P < 0.00001) weaker correlation, r = 0.5593 (0.4401–0.6592). On an individual vessel basis, CACS from all major vessels (LM, LAD, LCX, and RCA) contributed to the weaker correlation. For total vessel CACS, LCSCT demonstrated comparable area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (LCSCT AUC = 0.8133 and CCT AUC = 0.8302, P = 0.691) for prediction of MACE. Although ACCT demonstrated a similar AUC (ACCT AUC = 0.7969, P = 0.662) for MACE prediction the cutoff value for elevated risk was extremely low. In conclusion, LCSCT outperformed ACCT at calcium scoring by providing better agreement and comparable risk assessment to CCT despite the absence of ECG-gating. It is therefore reasonable to use LCSCT images to derive and report Agatston-based CACS for cardiovascular risk assessment, whereas the use of ACCT images to report Agatston-based CACS is not currently practical. Public Library of Science 2017-04-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5402939/ /pubmed/28437443 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175678 Text en https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) public domain dedication.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bailey, Grant
Healy, Abigail
Young, Bryan D.
Sharma, Esseim
Meadows, Judith
Chun, Hyung J.
Wu, Wen-Chih
Choudhary, Gaurav
Morrison, Alan R.
Relative predictive value of lung cancer screening CT versus myocardial perfusion attenuation correction CT in the evaluation of coronary calcium
title Relative predictive value of lung cancer screening CT versus myocardial perfusion attenuation correction CT in the evaluation of coronary calcium
title_full Relative predictive value of lung cancer screening CT versus myocardial perfusion attenuation correction CT in the evaluation of coronary calcium
title_fullStr Relative predictive value of lung cancer screening CT versus myocardial perfusion attenuation correction CT in the evaluation of coronary calcium
title_full_unstemmed Relative predictive value of lung cancer screening CT versus myocardial perfusion attenuation correction CT in the evaluation of coronary calcium
title_short Relative predictive value of lung cancer screening CT versus myocardial perfusion attenuation correction CT in the evaluation of coronary calcium
title_sort relative predictive value of lung cancer screening ct versus myocardial perfusion attenuation correction ct in the evaluation of coronary calcium
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5402939/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28437443
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175678
work_keys_str_mv AT baileygrant relativepredictivevalueoflungcancerscreeningctversusmyocardialperfusionattenuationcorrectionctintheevaluationofcoronarycalcium
AT healyabigail relativepredictivevalueoflungcancerscreeningctversusmyocardialperfusionattenuationcorrectionctintheevaluationofcoronarycalcium
AT youngbryand relativepredictivevalueoflungcancerscreeningctversusmyocardialperfusionattenuationcorrectionctintheevaluationofcoronarycalcium
AT sharmaesseim relativepredictivevalueoflungcancerscreeningctversusmyocardialperfusionattenuationcorrectionctintheevaluationofcoronarycalcium
AT meadowsjudith relativepredictivevalueoflungcancerscreeningctversusmyocardialperfusionattenuationcorrectionctintheevaluationofcoronarycalcium
AT chunhyungj relativepredictivevalueoflungcancerscreeningctversusmyocardialperfusionattenuationcorrectionctintheevaluationofcoronarycalcium
AT wuwenchih relativepredictivevalueoflungcancerscreeningctversusmyocardialperfusionattenuationcorrectionctintheevaluationofcoronarycalcium
AT choudharygaurav relativepredictivevalueoflungcancerscreeningctversusmyocardialperfusionattenuationcorrectionctintheevaluationofcoronarycalcium
AT morrisonalanr relativepredictivevalueoflungcancerscreeningctversusmyocardialperfusionattenuationcorrectionctintheevaluationofcoronarycalcium