Cargando…

Coronary artery calcium scoring on non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) using wide-detector, high-pitch and fast gantry rotation: comparison with dedicated calcium scoring CT

BACKGROUND: Our study assessed the reliability of non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (NCCT) (with high pitch, wide coverage, and fast gantry rotation time, reconstructed at various slice thicknesses), compared with the electrocardiography (ECG)-gated calcium scoring cardiac computed t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shin, Jae Min, Kim, Tae Hoon, Kim, Ji Young, Park, Chul Hwan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7656362/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33209410
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd-20-1371
_version_ 1783608366200782848
author Shin, Jae Min
Kim, Tae Hoon
Kim, Ji Young
Park, Chul Hwan
author_facet Shin, Jae Min
Kim, Tae Hoon
Kim, Ji Young
Park, Chul Hwan
author_sort Shin, Jae Min
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Our study assessed the reliability of non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (NCCT) (with high pitch, wide coverage, and fast gantry rotation time, reconstructed at various slice thicknesses), compared with the electrocardiography (ECG)-gated calcium scoring cardiac computed tomography (CaCT), for quantifying coronary artery calcification (CAC). METHODS: Patients aged ≥50 years who required clinical NCCT were prospectively enrolled. All CT scans were performed with 256-detector rows; z-axis coverage, 8 cm; pitch, 1.5; and gantry rotation time, 280 ms (table feed, 42.86 cm/s). NCCT was followed by ECG-gated CaCT. The NCCT images were reconstructed at 0.625-, 1.25-, and 2.5-mm slice intervals. The CAC score was calculated on four sets of CT images with a commercially available software using the Agatston method. The CAC scores were divided into four standard Agatston scoring categories (Agatston scores: 0, 1–100, 101–400, and >400). The inter-observer and inter-technique agreements were evaluated for the CAC scores. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients (M:F, 14:12; mean age, 66.04±6.97 years) were evaluated. Agatston scores showed near-perfect correlation between CaCT and NCCT for each slice thickness. On Bland-Altman analysis, the mean differences of Agatston scores between CaCT and NCCT (slice thicknesses: 0.625, 1.25, and 2.5 mm) were 37.54, 6.67, and −41.04, respectively. Inter-technique concordance was high for the four Agatston scoring categories with linear-weighted kappa values of 0.599, 0.609, and 0.597 for NCCT (slice thicknesses: 0.625, 1.25, and 2.5 mm, respectively). NCCT with 1.25-mm slice thickness showed the strongest correlation with CaCT. CONCLUSIONS: CAC quantification with NCCT using a wide detector, high pitch, and high temporal resolution scanning modes correlates very highly with ECG-gated CaCT, and 1.25-mm slice thickness NCCT images are more reliable than other NCCT images.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7656362
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher AME Publishing Company
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76563622020-11-17 Coronary artery calcium scoring on non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) using wide-detector, high-pitch and fast gantry rotation: comparison with dedicated calcium scoring CT Shin, Jae Min Kim, Tae Hoon Kim, Ji Young Park, Chul Hwan J Thorac Dis Original Article BACKGROUND: Our study assessed the reliability of non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (NCCT) (with high pitch, wide coverage, and fast gantry rotation time, reconstructed at various slice thicknesses), compared with the electrocardiography (ECG)-gated calcium scoring cardiac computed tomography (CaCT), for quantifying coronary artery calcification (CAC). METHODS: Patients aged ≥50 years who required clinical NCCT were prospectively enrolled. All CT scans were performed with 256-detector rows; z-axis coverage, 8 cm; pitch, 1.5; and gantry rotation time, 280 ms (table feed, 42.86 cm/s). NCCT was followed by ECG-gated CaCT. The NCCT images were reconstructed at 0.625-, 1.25-, and 2.5-mm slice intervals. The CAC score was calculated on four sets of CT images with a commercially available software using the Agatston method. The CAC scores were divided into four standard Agatston scoring categories (Agatston scores: 0, 1–100, 101–400, and >400). The inter-observer and inter-technique agreements were evaluated for the CAC scores. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients (M:F, 14:12; mean age, 66.04±6.97 years) were evaluated. Agatston scores showed near-perfect correlation between CaCT and NCCT for each slice thickness. On Bland-Altman analysis, the mean differences of Agatston scores between CaCT and NCCT (slice thicknesses: 0.625, 1.25, and 2.5 mm) were 37.54, 6.67, and −41.04, respectively. Inter-technique concordance was high for the four Agatston scoring categories with linear-weighted kappa values of 0.599, 0.609, and 0.597 for NCCT (slice thicknesses: 0.625, 1.25, and 2.5 mm, respectively). NCCT with 1.25-mm slice thickness showed the strongest correlation with CaCT. CONCLUSIONS: CAC quantification with NCCT using a wide detector, high pitch, and high temporal resolution scanning modes correlates very highly with ECG-gated CaCT, and 1.25-mm slice thickness NCCT images are more reliable than other NCCT images. AME Publishing Company 2020-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7656362/ /pubmed/33209410 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd-20-1371 Text en 2020 Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Shin, Jae Min
Kim, Tae Hoon
Kim, Ji Young
Park, Chul Hwan
Coronary artery calcium scoring on non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) using wide-detector, high-pitch and fast gantry rotation: comparison with dedicated calcium scoring CT
title Coronary artery calcium scoring on non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) using wide-detector, high-pitch and fast gantry rotation: comparison with dedicated calcium scoring CT
title_full Coronary artery calcium scoring on non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) using wide-detector, high-pitch and fast gantry rotation: comparison with dedicated calcium scoring CT
title_fullStr Coronary artery calcium scoring on non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) using wide-detector, high-pitch and fast gantry rotation: comparison with dedicated calcium scoring CT
title_full_unstemmed Coronary artery calcium scoring on non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) using wide-detector, high-pitch and fast gantry rotation: comparison with dedicated calcium scoring CT
title_short Coronary artery calcium scoring on non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) using wide-detector, high-pitch and fast gantry rotation: comparison with dedicated calcium scoring CT
title_sort coronary artery calcium scoring on non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (ct) using wide-detector, high-pitch and fast gantry rotation: comparison with dedicated calcium scoring ct
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7656362/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33209410
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd-20-1371
work_keys_str_mv AT shinjaemin coronaryarterycalciumscoringonnongatednoncontrastchestcomputedtomographyctusingwidedetectorhighpitchandfastgantryrotationcomparisonwithdedicatedcalciumscoringct
AT kimtaehoon coronaryarterycalciumscoringonnongatednoncontrastchestcomputedtomographyctusingwidedetectorhighpitchandfastgantryrotationcomparisonwithdedicatedcalciumscoringct
AT kimjiyoung coronaryarterycalciumscoringonnongatednoncontrastchestcomputedtomographyctusingwidedetectorhighpitchandfastgantryrotationcomparisonwithdedicatedcalciumscoringct
AT parkchulhwan coronaryarterycalciumscoringonnongatednoncontrastchestcomputedtomographyctusingwidedetectorhighpitchandfastgantryrotationcomparisonwithdedicatedcalciumscoringct