RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of additional coronary calcium scoring on total effective radiation dose and diagnostic accuracy of low-dose computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) with prospective electrocardiogram (ECG) triggering. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-one consecutive patients underwent 64-slice CTCA using prospective ECG triggering, calcium scoring, and invasive quantitative coronary angiography, the latter served as standard of reference. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated for CTCA, calcium scoring, and for the combination of both. Receiver operator characteristic analyses were performed to determine cutoffs for prediction of significant coronary artery stenoses. RESULTS: Mean effective radiation dose was 2.1 + or - 0.7 mSv (range, 1.0-3.3 mSv) for CTCA and 1.1 + or - 0.1 mSv (range, 0.9-1.4 mSv) for calcium scoring. Per-patient sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 100%, 85.7%, 89.2%, and 100% for CTCA, and 72.7%, 82.1%, 82.8%, and 71.9% for calcium scoring. Adding calcium-scoring with a cutoff at 133 in patients aged >50.7 years with nondiagnostic CTCA improved the respective values of diagnostic accuracy of the entire study population to 100%, 96.4%, 97.1%, and 100%; the added value of calcium scoring was confined to only three patients (5%), who were reclassified from false positive to true negative. CONCLUSION: Specificity and PPV of low-dose CTCA may be further improved by combining it with coronary calcium scoring. However, only a fraction of patient may benefit, whereas exposing the entire population to more than 50% increase in effective radiation dose. Copyright 2010 AUR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of additional coronary calcium scoring on total effective radiation dose and diagnostic accuracy of low-dose computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) with prospective electrocardiogram (ECG) triggering. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-one consecutive patients underwent 64-slice CTCA using prospective ECG triggering, calcium scoring, and invasive quantitative coronary angiography, the latter served as standard of reference. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated for CTCA, calcium scoring, and for the combination of both. Receiver operator characteristic analyses were performed to determine cutoffs for prediction of significant coronary artery stenoses. RESULTS: Mean effective radiation dose was 2.1 + or - 0.7 mSv (range, 1.0-3.3 mSv) for CTCA and 1.1 + or - 0.1 mSv (range, 0.9-1.4 mSv) for calcium scoring. Per-patient sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 100%, 85.7%, 89.2%, and 100% for CTCA, and 72.7%, 82.1%, 82.8%, and 71.9% for calcium scoring. Adding calcium-scoring with a cutoff at 133 in patients aged >50.7 years with nondiagnostic CTCA improved the respective values of diagnostic accuracy of the entire study population to 100%, 96.4%, 97.1%, and 100%; the added value of calcium scoring was confined to only three patients (5%), who were reclassified from false positive to true negative. CONCLUSION: Specificity and PPV of low-dose CTCA may be further improved by combining it with coronary calcium scoring. However, only a fraction of patient may benefit, whereas exposing the entire population to more than 50% increase in effective radiation dose. Copyright 2010 AUR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Mohamed Mouden; Jan Paul Ottervanger; Jorik R Timmer; Stoffer Reiffers; Ad H J Oostdijk; Siert Knollema; Pieter L Jager Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2013-12-07 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Irene A Burger; Lars Husmann; Bernhard A Herzog; Ronny R Buechel; Aju P Pazhenkottil; Jelena R Ghadri; Rene N Nkoulou; Rolf Jenni; Erich W Russi; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2011-06-18 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Jelena R Ghadri; Silke M Küest; Robert Goetti; Michael Fiechter; Aju P Pazhenkottil; Rene N Nkoulou; Felix P Kuhn; Carsten Pietsch; Patrick von Schulthess; Oliver Gaemperli; Christian Templin; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-07-10 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Olivier F Clerc; Basil P Kaufmann; Mathias Possner; Riccardo Liga; Jan Vontobel; Fran Mikulicic; Christoph Gräni; Dominik C Benz; Tobias A Fuchs; Julia Stehli; Aju P Pazhenkottil; Oliver Gaemperli; Philipp A Kaufmann; Ronny R Buechel Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Tobias A Fuchs; Julia Stehli; Svetlana Dougoud; Bert-Ram Sah; Sacha Bull; Olivier F Clerc; Mathias Possner; Ronny R Buechel; Oliver Gaemperli; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-07-04 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Linfeng Yang; Tao Zhou; Ruijie Zhang; Lin Xu; Zhaohui Peng; Juan Ding; Sen Wang; Min Li; Gang Sun Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-05-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Axel Schmermund; Mohamed Marwan; Jörg Hausleiter; Sebastian Barth; Oliver Bruder; Sebastian Kerber; Grigorius Korosoglou; Alexander Leber; Werner Moshage; Stephen Schröder; Steffen Schneider; Jochen Senges; Stephan Achenbach Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-07-19 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Georgios Benetos; Ronny R Buechel; Marisa Gonçalves; Dominik C Benz; Elia von Felten; Georgios P Rampidis; Olivier F Clerc; Michael Messerli; Andreas A Giannopoulos; Cathérine Gebhard; Tobias A Fuchs; Aju P Pazhenkottil; Philipp A Kaufmann; Christoph Gräni Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 2.357