Serial electron beam CT measurements of coronary artery calcium: Has your patient's calcium score actually changed?

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 185, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 1546-1553

  Sevrukov, Alexander B ^a,b   Bland, J Martin ^c   Kondos, George T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS   (United States)

^b WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CALCIUM;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY ATHEROSCLEROSIS; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; ELECTRON BEAM TOMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MEASUREMENT ERROR; NON INVASIVE MEASUREMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPEAT PROCEDURE; AGED; CALCINOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; IMAGE PROCESSING; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY;

AGED; CALCINOSIS; CORONARY DISEASE; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 33644829643     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.04.1589     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Rumberger JA, Simons DB, Fitzpatrick LA, Sheedy PF, Schwartz RS. Coronary artery calcium area by electron-beam computed tomography and coronary atherosclerotic plaque area: a histopathologic correlative study. Circulation 1995; 92:2157-2162
2. Sangiorgi G, Rumberger JA, Severson A, et al. Arterial calcification and not lumen stenosis is highly correlated with atherosclerotic plaque burden in humans: a histologic study of 723 coronary artery segments using nondecalcifying methodology. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 31:126-133
3. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1:307-310
4. International Organization for Standardization. Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results. Part 1. General principles and definitions. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization, 1994:ISO 5725-1
5. Bielak LF, Kaufmann RB, Moll PP, McCollough CH, Schwartz RS, Sheedy PF II. Small lesions in the heart identified at electron beam CT: calcification or noise? Radiology 1995; 195:576-577
6. Lu B, Budoff MJ, Zhuang N, et al. Causes of interscan variability of coronary artery calcium measurements at electron-beam CT. Acad Radiol 2002; 9:654-661
7. Devries S, Wolfkiel C, Shah V, Chomka E, Rich S. Reproducibility of the measurement of coronary calcium with ultrafast computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 1995; 75:973-975
8. Wang S, Detrano RC, Secci A, et al. Detection of coronary calcification with electron-beam computed tomography: evaluation of interexamination reproducibility and comparison of three image-acquisition protocols. Am Heart J 1996; 132:550-558
9. Callister TQ, Cooil B, Raya SP, Lippolis NJ, Russo DJ, Raggi P. Coronary artery disease: improved reproducibility of calcium scoring with an electron-beam CT volumetric method. Radiology 1998; 208:807-814
10. Yoon HC, Goldin JG, Greaser LE 3rd, Sayre J, Fonarow GC. Interscan variation in coronary artery calcium quantification in a large asymptomatic patient population. AJR 2000; 174:803-809
11. Mao S, Budoff MJ, Bakhsheshi H, Liu SC. Improved reproducibility of coronary artery calcium scoring by electron beam tomography with a new electrocardiographic trigger method. Invest Radiol 2001; 36:363-367
12. Mao S, Bakhsheshi H, Lu B, Liu SC, Oudiz RJ, Budoff MJ. Effect of electrocardiogram triggering on reproducibility of coronary artery calcium scoring. Radiology 2001; 220:707-711
13. Achenbach S, Meissner F, Ropers D, et al. Overlapping cross-sections significantly improve the reproducibility of coronary calcium measurements by electron beam tomography: a phantom study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 200l; 25:569-573
14. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Mohlenkamp S, et al. Variability of repeated coronary artery calcium measurements by electron beam tomography. Am J Cardiol 2001; 87:210-213, A8
15. Budoff MJ, Mao S, Lu B, et al. Ability of calibration phantom to reduce the interscan variability in electron beam computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002; 26:886-891
16. Lu B, Zhuang N, Mao SS, et al. EKG-triggered CT data acquisition to reduce variability in coronary arterial calcium score. Radiology 2002; 224:838-844
17. Bielak LF, Sheedy PF 2nd, Peyser PA. Coronary artery calcification measured at electron-beam CT: agreement in dual scan runs and change over time. Radiology 2001; 218:224-229
18. Hokanson JE, MacKenzie T, Kinney G, et al. Evaluating changes in coronary artery calcium: an analytic method that accounts for interscan variability. AJR 2004; 182:1327-1332
19. Wei X, Guttmann CR, Warfield SK, Eliasziw M, Mitchell JR. Has your patient's multiple sclerosis lesion burden or brain atrophy actually changed? Mult Scler 2004; 10:402-406
20. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999; 8:135-160
21. Bland JM, Altman DG. The use of transformation when comparing two means. BMJ 1996; 312:1153
22. Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hildner FJ, Zusmer NR, Viamonte M, Detrano R. Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 15:827-832
23. Raya SP, Udupa JK. Shape-based interpolation of multidimensional objects. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1990; 9:32-42
24. Hoff JA, Chomka EV, Krainik AJ, et al. Age and gender distributions of coronary artery calcium detected by electron beam tomography in 35,246 adults. Am J Cardiol 2001; 87:1335-1339
25. Hoff JA, Daviglus ML, Chomka EV, Krainik AJ, Sevrukov A, Kondos GT. Conventional coronary artery disease risk factors and coronary artery calcium detected by electron beam tomography in 30,908 healthy individuals. Ann Epidemiol 2003; 13:163-169
26. Altman DG. Construction of age-related reference centiles using absolute residuals. Stat Med 1993; 12:917-924
27. Bland JM, Altman DG. Applying the right statistics: analyses of measurement studies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 22:85-93
28. Royston P, Altman DG. Regression using fractional polynomials of continuous covariates: parsimonious parametric modeling. Appl Statist 1994; 43:429-467
29. Bland M. An introduction to medical statistics, 3rd ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2000: 133
30. Auleley G-R, Rousselin B, Ayral X, Edouard-Noel R, Dougados M, Ravaud P. Osteoarthritis of the hip: agreement between joint space width measurements on standing and supine conventional radiographs. Ann Rheum Dis 1998; 57:519-523
31. Auleley G-R, Duche A, Drape J-L, Dougados M, Ravaud P. Measurement of joint space width in hip osteoarthritis: influence of joint positioning and radiographic procedure. Rheumatology 2001; 40:414-419
32. Cicero S, Skentou C, Souka A, To MS, Nicolaides KH. Cervical length at 22-24 weeks of gestation: comparison of transvaginal and transperineal- translabial ultrasonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 17:335-340
33. Dyer CA, Singh SJ, Stockley RA, Sinclair AJ, Hill SL. The incremental shuttle walking test in elderly people with chronic airflow limitation. Thorax 2002; 57:34-38