Spiral versus electron-beam CT for coronary artery calcium scoring.

Goldin, J G; Yoon, H C; Greaser, L E; Heinze, S B; McNitt-Gray, M M; Brown, M S; Sayre, J W; Emerick, A M et al. · Radiology · 2001

retrospective_cohort · Level III

Where this comes from

Abstract

To determine differences in coronary artery calcium detection, quantification, and reproducibility, as measured at electron-beam computed tomography (CT) and subsecond spiral CT with retrospective electrocardiogram gating in an asymptomatic adult population. Seventy subjects asymptomatic for coronary heart disease underwent both electron-beam CT and subsecond spiral CT. In all subjects, two images each were obtained with both scanners. Two experienced readers using three different algorithms scored each of the four scans: one score for the electron-beam CT images and two scores for the spiral CT images. With a 130-HU threshold for the quantification of calcium, there were no significant differences in interscan and interobserver variation in calcium scores between the electron-beam CT and spiral CT images. There was greater interobserver (P <.001) and interscan (P <.03) variation in scores when a 90-HU threshold was used for spiral CT images. With a 130-HU threshold, when calcium scores were used for clinical risk stratification, there was a significant difference between the results obtained with electron-beam CT and those obtained with spiral CT (P <.05). Spiral CT has not yet proved to be a feasible alternative to electron-beam CT for coronary artery calcium quantification. There are systematic differences between calcium scores obtained with single-detector array subsecond spiral CT and those obtained with electron-beam CT.

Medical subject headings