Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate how accurately CAC volume we can be measured using electron beam computed tomography (CT) and 16-slice spiral CT. CAC models with known volume attached to a cardiac phantom were scanned. The error of measurement, variability between measured and real volumes, and inter-scan measurement variability were obtained. For spiral CT, seven different parameters were included: (1) slice thickness (0.625 mm, 1.25 mm and 2.5 mm), (2) retrospective spiral electrocardiograph (ECG)-gated or prospective axial ECG-triggering, (3) overlapping or non-overlapping. The error of measurement was 15% on electron beam CT and 8–20% on spiral CT. CAC volumes were underestimated in 92% and overestimated in 8% of the electron beam CT scans. Volumes were underestimated in 79%, correct in 5% and overestimated in 16% of the spiral CT scans. The best measurement and the least variability was observed on 0.625-mm retrospective spiral ECG-gated CT (error of 8%), a significant result (t-test: P<0.01) when compared with electron beam CT. CAC volume measurement on CT scanners may be significantly different and often underestimates the real volume of CAC. For precise evaluation of CAC volume, thin-slice retrospective spiral ECG-gated scan using a spiral CT scanner is desirable.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arad Y, Spadaro LA, Goodman K, Newstein D, Guerci AD (2000) Prediction of coronary events with electron beam computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 36:1253–1260
Wong ND, Hsu JC, Detrano RC, Diamond G, Eisenberg H, Gardin JM (2000) Coronary artery calcium evaluation by electron beam computed tomography and its relation to new cardiovascular events. Am J Cardiol 86:495–498
Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hildner FJ, Zusmer NR, Viamonte M, Detrano R (1990) Quantification of coronary calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 15:827–832
Callister TQ, Raggi P, Cooil B, Lippolis NJ, Russo DJ (1998) Effect of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors on coronary artery disease as assessed by electron-beam computed tomography. N Engl J Med 339:1972–1978
Budoff MJ, Lane KL, Bakhsheshi H et al (2000) Rates of progression of coronary calcium by electron beam tomography. Am J Cardiol 86:8–11
Callister TQ, Cooil B, Raya SP et al (1998) Coronary artery disease: improved reproducibility of calcium scoring with an electron-beam CT volumetric method. Radiology 208:807–814
Detrano R, Kang X, Mahaisavariya P et al (1994) Accuracy of quantifying coronary hydroxyapatite with electron beam tomography. Invest Radiol 29:733–738
Horiguchi J, Nakanishi T, Ito K (2001) Quantification of coronary artery calcium using multidetector CT and a retrospective ECG-gating reconstruction algorithm. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:1429–1435
Kopp AF, Ohnesorge B, Becker C et al (2002) Reproducibility and accuracy of coronary calcium measurements with multi-detector row versus electron-beam CT. Radiology 225:113–119
Kajinami K, Seki H, Takekoshi N, Mabuchi H (1993) Quantification of coronary artery calcification using ultrafast computed tomography: reproducibility of measurements. Coron Artery Dis 4:1103–1108
Yoon HC, Greaser III LE, Mather R et al (1997) Coronary artery calcium: alternate methods for accurate and reproducible quantification. Acta Radiol 4:666–673
Mao S, Bakhsheshi H, Lu B, Liu SCK, Oudiz RJ, Budoff MJ (2001) Effect of electrocardiogram triggering on reproducibility of coronary artery calcium scoring. Radiology 220:707–711
Bielak LF, Kaufmann RB, Moll PP, McCollough CH, Schwartz RS, Sheedy PF (1994) Small lesions in the heart identified at electron beam CT: calcification or noise? Radiology 192:631–636
McCollough CH, Kaufmann RB, Cameron BM, Katz DJ, Sheedy PF, Peyser PA (1995) Electron-beam CT: use of a calibration phantom to reduce variability in calcium quantification. Radiology 196:159–165
Achenbach S, Ropers D, Mohlenkamp S et al (2001) Variability of repeated coronary artery calcium measurements by electron beam tomography. Am J Cardiol 87:210–213
van Ooijen PM, Vliegenthart R, Witteman JCM, Oudkerk M (2005) Influence of scoring parameter settings on Agatston and volume scores for coronary calcification. Eur Radiol 15:102–110
Ohnesorge B, Flohr T, Fischbach R et al (2002) Reproducibility of coronary calcium quantification in repeat examinations with retrospectively ECG-gated multisection spiral CT. Eur Radiol 12:1532–1540
Ulzheimer S, Kalender WA (2003) Assessment of coronary artery scoring performance in cardiac computed tomography. Eur Radiol 13:484–497
Rumberger JA, Brundage BH, Rader DJ, Kondos G (1999) Electron beam computed tomographic coronary calcium scanning: a review and guidelines for use in asymptomatic patients. Mayo Clin Proc 74:243–252
Becker CR, Majeed A, Crispin A et al (2005) CT measurement of coronary calcium mass: impact on global cardiac risk assessment. Eur Radiol 15:96–101
Wicky S, Rosol M, Hamberg LM, et al (2002) Evaluation of retrospective multisector and half scan ECG-gated multidetector cardiac CT protocols with moving phantoms. J Comput Assist Tomogr 26:768–776
Schlosser T, Hunold P, Schmermund A et al (2004) Coronary artery calcium score: influence of reconstruction interval at 16-detector row CT with retrospective electrocardiographic gating. Radiology 233:586–589
Nelson JC, Kronmal RA, Carr JJ et al (2005) Measuring coronary calcium on CT images adjusted for attenuation differences. Radiology 235:403–414
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Horiguchi, J., Shen, Y., Akiyama, Y. et al. Electron beam CT versus 16-slice spiral CT: how accurately can we measure coronary artery calcium volume?. Eur Radiol 16, 374–380 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-2904-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-2904-9