Back to Search
Start Over
Quantification of abdominal aortic calcification: Inherent measurement errors in current computed tomography imaging
- Source :
- PLoS ONE, Vol 13, Iss 2, p e0193419 (2018), PLoS ONE, 13(2):0193419. PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE, PLoS ONE, PLoS ONE, 13(2). Public Library of Science
- Publication Year :
- 2018
- Publisher :
- Public Library of Science (PLoS), 2018.
-
Abstract
- ObjectiveQuantification software for coronary calcification is often used to measure abdominal aortic calcification on computed tomography (CT) images. However, there is no evidence substantiating the reliability and accuracy of these tools in this setting. Differences in coronary and abdominal CT acquisition and presence of intravascular contrast may affect the results of these tools. Therefore, this study investigates the effects of CT acquisition parameters and iodine contrast on automated quantification of aortic calcium on CT.MethodsCalcium scores, provided in volume and mass, were assessed by automated calcium quantification software on CT scans. First, differences in calcium scores between the abdominal and coronary CT scanning protocols were assessed by imaging a thorax phantom containing calcifications of 9 metrical variations. Second, aortic calcification was quantified in 50 unenhanced and contrast-enhanced clinical abdominal CT scans at a calcification threshold of 299 Hounsfield Units (HU). Also, the lowest possible HU threshold for calcifications was calculated per individual patient and compared to a 130 HU threshold between contrast enhanced and unenhanced CT images, respectively.ResultsNo significant differences in volume and mass scores between the abdominal and the coronary CT protocol were found. However, volume and mass of all calcifications were overestimated compared to the physical volume and mass (volume range: 0-649%; mass range: 0-2619%). In comparing unenhanced versus contrast-enhanced CT images showed significant volume differences for both thresholds, as well as for mass differences for the 130 vs patient-specific threshold (230 +/- 22.6 HU).ConclusionCalcification scoring on CT angiography tends to grossly overestimate volume and mass suggesting a low accuracy and reliability. These are reduced further by interference of intravascular contrast. Future studies applying calcium quantification tools on CT angiography imaging should acknowledge these issues and apply corrective measures to ensure the validity of their outcomes.
- Subjects :
- Thorax
Research Validity
PREDICTOR
Physiology
lcsh:Medicine
Computed tomography
030204 cardiovascular system & hematology
Diagnostic Radiology
030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging
0302 clinical medicine
REPRODUCIBILITY
Medicine and Health Sciences
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
Aorta, Abdominal
lcsh:Science
Tomography
Aorta
Multidisciplinary
medicine.diagnostic_test
Phantoms, Imaging
Radiology and Imaging
Software Engineering
Research Assessment
Calcium Imaging
Research Design
Engineering and Technology
Anatomy
Research Article
CT
Computer and Information Sciences
Imaging Techniques
Neuroimaging
Research and Analysis Methods
Radiation Dosage
Imaging phantom
Calcification
03 medical and health sciences
Diagnostic Medicine
CORONARY-ARTERY CALCIUM
medicine.artery
Hounsfield scale
medicine
RECONSTRUCTION
RATES
Vascular Calcification
CARDIOVASCULAR EVENTS
Reproducibility
Software Tools
business.industry
lcsh:R
Biology and Life Sciences
Reproducibility of Results
medicine.disease
Computed Axial Tomography
ATHEROSCLEROSIS
Angiography
Cardiovascular Anatomy
Gastrointestinal Imaging
Blood Vessels
lcsh:Q
Physiological Processes
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
Nuclear medicine
business
Liver and Spleen Scan
Neuroscience
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 19326203
- Volume :
- 13
- Issue :
- 2
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- PLoS ONE
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....54828ceaa2eefbfc37c9a87e98e2c39b