Radiology 2001; 221:213-221
Goldin Jonathan G., Yoon Hyo-Chun, Greaser III Lloyd E., Heinze Stefan B., McNitt-Gray Michael M., Brown Matthew S., Sayre James W., Emerick Aletha M., Aberle Denise R.
PURPOSE: To determine differences in coronary artery calcium detection, quantification, and reproducibility, as measured at electron-beam computed tomography (CT) and subsecond spiral CT with retrospective electrocardiogram gating in an asymptomatic adult population.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy subjects asymptomatic for coronary heart disease underwent both electron-beam CT and subsecond spiral CT. In all subjects, two images each were obtained with both scanners. Two experienced readers using three different algorithms scored each of the four scans: one score for the electron-beam CT images and two scores for the spiral CT images.
RESULTS: With a 130-HU threshold for the quantification of calcium, there were no significant differences in interscan and interobserver variation in calcium scores between the electron-beam CT and spiral CT images. There was greater interobserver (P < .001) and interscan (P < .03) variation in scores when a 90-HU threshold was used for spiral CT images. With a 130-HU threshold, when calcium scores were used for clinical risk stratification, there was a significant difference between the results obtained with electron-beam CT and those obtained with spiral CT (P < .05).
CONCLUSION: Spiral CT has not yet proved to be a feasible alternative to electron-beam CT for coronary artery calcium quantification. There are systematic differences between calcium scores obtained with single-detector array subsecond spiral CT and those obtained with electron-beam CT.