Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Coronary artery calcium quantification at multi-detector row helical CT versus electron-beam CT.

      Radiology
      Adult, Aged, Calcinosis, radiography, Calcium, analysis, Coronary Angiography, Coronary Artery Disease, Female, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Mathematical Computing, Middle Aged, Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Reproducibility of Results, Tomography, Spiral Computed, Tomography, X-Ray Computed

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          To compare coronary artery calcium scores from a multi-detector row helical computed tomographic (CT) scanner with those from an electron-beam CT scanner, with emphasis on subjects with calcium scores less than 400. Seventy-eight asymptomatic subjects (37 women, 41 men; age range, 39-78 years; mean age, 54.2 years) underwent multi-detector row CT and electron-beam CT. Volume and Agatston scores were calculated with a workstation. Statistical analyses included assessment of association between calcium scores from two scanners, calculation of percent absolute difference to assess score variability between scanners, equivalence analysis, construction of Bland-Altman plots to assess agreement between scores, and assessment of changes in score grouping and risk criteria based on score differences between scanners. Electron-beam CT calcium scores were higher than multi-detector row CT scores. Linear association between calcium scores obtained from paired scans was significant (r = 0.96-0.99, P <.001). Mean percent absolute differences were 67.9% and 65.0% for volume and Agatston scores, respectively (48.6% and 46.3% for corresponding natural log-transformed scores). In subjects with a score of 11 or greater, mean percent absolute differences between electron-beam CT and multi-detector row CT scores ranged from 15% to 30% (<10% for natural log-transformed calcium scores). With a 20% equivalence limit, calcium scores from the two scanners were statistically equivalent (P <.05). Score grouping would have been subject to change in 12 (11 increased and one decreased; six with scores of 11 or greater), and possible risk management decisions would have been subject to change in eight (16%) of 51 subjects who underwent electron-beam CT versus multi-detector row CT scanning. Multi-detector row CT appears to be comparable to electron-beam CT for coronary calcification screening, except in subjects with a calcium score less than 11. Copyright RSNA, 2004

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article

          scite_
          0
          0
          0
          0
          Smart Citations
          0
          0
          0
          0
          Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
          View Citations

          See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

          scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

          Similar content20

          Cited by12