UNLABELLED: The global coronary calcium score has been widely used in the evaluation of coronary plaque burden and cardiovascular disease events. In this study, we investigated the value of segmental coronary calcium score (SCCS) on the diagnosis and interventional treatment. We studied 87 patients with coronary angiography (CAG) and coronary CT angiography (CTA) by 320-slice dynamic volume CT (DVCT). SCCS was determined for each segmental separately. All lesions which SCCS was greater than 0 were enrolled, and were divided into three groups, mild calcification group (SCCS were less than 80), Moderate calcification group (SCCS were more than 80 and less than 200) and Severe calcification group (SCCS were more than 200). From above three groups, lesions received the intervention treatment were elected as subgroup. The position of lesions, plaque morphology, calcification proportion and interventional treatment data were analyzed. Severe calcification group were more frequent in the proximal lesions, stenosis with lesser extent, nubbly and nodular types of plaque, and the inconsistency with CAG was higher than the other two groups (P < 0.05). In the subgroup, more pre-dilatation and post-dilatation balloon were used in severe calcification group, with higher expansion pressure of balloon and stent (P < 0.05), but the diameter of stents was no difference between the three groups. CONCLUSION: SCCS is better than GCCS in the evaluation of coronary calcification, and play an important role in the judgment of stenosis by coronary CT and in the choice of interventional therapeutic devices.
UNLABELLED: The global coronary calcium score has been widely used in the evaluation of coronary plaque burden and cardiovascular disease events. In this study, we investigated the value of segmental coronary calcium score (SCCS) on the diagnosis and interventional treatment. We studied 87 patients with coronary angiography (CAG) and coronary CT angiography (CTA) by 320-slice dynamic volume CT (DVCT). SCCS was determined for each segmental separately. All lesions which SCCS was greater than 0 were enrolled, and were divided into three groups, mild calcification group (SCCS were less than 80), Moderate calcification group (SCCS were more than 80 and less than 200) and Severe calcification group (SCCS were more than 200). From above three groups, lesions received the intervention treatment were elected as subgroup. The position of lesions, plaque morphology, calcification proportion and interventional treatment data were analyzed. Severe calcification group were more frequent in the proximal lesions, stenosis with lesser extent, nubbly and nodular types of plaque, and the inconsistency with CAG was higher than the other two groups (P < 0.05). In the subgroup, more pre-dilatation and post-dilatation balloon were used in severe calcification group, with higher expansion pressure of balloon and stent (P < 0.05), but the diameter of stents was no difference between the three groups. CONCLUSION: SCCS is better than GCCS in the evaluation of coronary calcification, and play an important role in the judgment of stenosis by coronary CT and in the choice of interventional therapeutic devices.
Authors: Margaret Leila Rasouli; David M Shavelle; William J French; Charles R McKay; Matthew J Budoff Journal: Coron Artery Dis Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 1.439
Authors: Patricia Carrascosa; Carlos Capuñay; Alejandro Deviggiano; Alejandro Goldsmit; Carlos Tajer; Marcelo Bettinotti; Jorge Carrascosa; Thomas B Ivanc; Arzhang Fallahi; Mario J García Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2010-04-11
Authors: P C Keelan; L F Bielak; K Ashai; L S Jamjoum; A E Denktas; J A Rumberger; P F Sheedy II; P A Peyser; R S Schwartz Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-07-24 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Maarten J G Leening; Suzette E Elias-Smale; Maryam Kavousi; Janine F Felix; Jaap W Deckers; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Matthijs Oudkerk; Albert Hofman; Ewout W Steyerberg; Bruno H Ch Stricker; Jacqueline C M Witteman Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-09
Authors: Benedetta Enrico; Pal Suranyi; Christian Thilo; Lorenzo Bonomo; Philip Costello; U Joseph Schoepf Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-11-15 Impact factor: 5.315