OBJECTIVES: To validate the reliability of the visual coronary artery calcification score (VCACS) on low-dose CT (LDCT) for concurrent screening of CAC and lung cancer. METHODS: We enrolled 401 subjects receiving LDCT for lung cancer screening and ECG-gated CT for the Agatston score (AS). LDCT was reconstructed with 3- and 5-mm slice thickness (LDCT-3mm and LDCT-5mm respectively) for VCACS to obtain VCACS-3mm and VCACS-5mm respectively. After a training session comprising 32 cases, two observers performed four-scale VCACS (absent, mild, moderate, severe) of 369 data sets independently, the results were compared with four-scale AS (0, 1-100, 101-400, >400). RESULTS: CACs were present in 39.6 % (146/369) of subjects. The sensitivity of VCACS-3mm was higher than for VCACS-5mm (83.6 % versus 74.0 %). The median of AS of the 24 false-negative cases in VCACS-3mm was 2.3 (range 1.1-21.1). The false-negative rate for detecting AS ≥ 10 on LDCT-3mm was 1.9 %. VCACS-3mm had higher concordance with AS than VCACS-5mm (k = 0.813 versus k = 0.685). An extended test of VCACS-3mm for four junior observers showed high inter-observer reliability (intra-class correlation = 0.90) and good concordance with AS (k = 0.662-0.747). CONCLUSIONS: This study validated the reliability of VCACS on LDCT for lung cancer screening and showed that LDCT-3mm was more feasible than LDCT-5mm for CAD risk stratification. KEY POINTS: • Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) rarely misses significant coronary artery calcification (CAC). • Visual scoring of CAC on LDCT is highly concordant with Agatston scoring. • LDCT-3mm is more feasible than LDCT-5mm for CAD risk stratification. • CAC assessment enriched the screening information for LDCT lung cancer screening.
OBJECTIVES: To validate the reliability of the visual coronary artery calcification score (VCACS) on low-dose CT (LDCT) for concurrent screening of CAC and lung cancer. METHODS: We enrolled 401 subjects receiving LDCT for lung cancer screening and ECG-gated CT for the Agatston score (AS). LDCT was reconstructed with 3- and 5-mm slice thickness (LDCT-3mm and LDCT-5mm respectively) for VCACS to obtain VCACS-3mm and VCACS-5mm respectively. After a training session comprising 32 cases, two observers performed four-scale VCACS (absent, mild, moderate, severe) of 369 data sets independently, the results were compared with four-scale AS (0, 1-100, 101-400, >400). RESULTS: CACs were present in 39.6 % (146/369) of subjects. The sensitivity of VCACS-3mm was higher than for VCACS-5mm (83.6 % versus 74.0 %). The median of AS of the 24 false-negative cases in VCACS-3mm was 2.3 (range 1.1-21.1). The false-negative rate for detecting AS ≥ 10 on LDCT-3mm was 1.9 %. VCACS-3mm had higher concordance with AS than VCACS-5mm (k = 0.813 versus k = 0.685). An extended test of VCACS-3mm for four junior observers showed high inter-observer reliability (intra-class correlation = 0.90) and good concordance with AS (k = 0.662-0.747). CONCLUSIONS: This study validated the reliability of VCACS on LDCT for lung cancer screening and showed that LDCT-3mm was more feasible than LDCT-5mm for CAD risk stratification. KEY POINTS: • Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) rarely misses significant coronary artery calcification (CAC). • Visual scoring of CAC on LDCT is highly concordant with Agatston scoring. • LDCT-3mm is more feasible than LDCT-5mm for CAD risk stratification. • CAC assessment enriched the screening information for LDCT lung cancer screening.
Authors: Heber MacMahon; John H M Austin; Gordon Gamsu; Christian J Herold; James R Jett; David P Naidich; Edward F Patz; Stephen J Swensen Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Peter C Jacobs; Mathias Prokop; Yolanda van der Graaf; Martijn J Gondrie; Kristel J Janssen; Harry J de Koning; Ivana Isgum; Rob J van Klaveren; Matthijs Oudkerk; Bram van Ginneken; Willem P Mali Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2009-09-26 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Andrew J Einstein; Lynne L Johnson; Sabahat Bokhari; Jessica Son; Randall C Thompson; Timothy M Bateman; Sean W Hayes; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-11-30 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Raimund Erbel; Stefan Möhlenkamp; Susanne Moebus; Axel Schmermund; Nils Lehmann; Andreas Stang; Nico Dragano; Dietrich Grönemeyer; Rainer Seibel; Hagen Kälsch; Martina Bröcker-Preuss; Klaus Mann; Johannes Siegrist; Karl-Heinz Jöckel Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-10-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Caroline Chiles; Fenghai Duan; Gregory W Gladish; James G Ravenel; Scott G Baginski; Bradley S Snyder; Sarah DeMello; Stephanie S Desjardins; Reginald F Munden Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-03-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Omar Dzaye; Philipp Berning; Zeina A Dardari; Daniel S Berman; Matthew J Budoff; Michael D Miedema; Khurram Nasir; Alan Rozanski; John A Rumberger; Leslee J Shaw; Martin Bødtker Mortensen; Seamus P Whelton; Michael J Blaha Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2021-10-18 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Roman Zeleznik; Borek Foldyna; Parastou Eslami; Jakob Weiss; Ivanov Alexander; Jana Taron; Chintan Parmar; Raza M Alvi; Dahlia Banerji; Mio Uno; Yasuka Kikuchi; Julia Karady; Lili Zhang; Jan-Erik Scholtz; Thomas Mayrhofer; Asya Lyass; Taylor F Mahoney; Joseph M Massaro; Ramachandran S Vasan; Pamela S Douglas; Udo Hoffmann; Michael T Lu; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Christopher Yu; Austin C C Ng; Lloyd Ridley; Mekhala Anjaria; Silvan Meier; John Yiannikas; Leonard Kritharides; Christopher Naoum Journal: Open Heart Date: 2021-10
Authors: Lu Chen; Andrey Vavrenyuk; Jun Hong Ren; Pankil Desai; Joseph Bahgat; Michael A Bernstein; Michael I Ebright; Mamatha Gowda; Suzanne Rose; Arzhang Fallahi; Brian Stainken; David H Hsi Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2021-06-16