HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Detrano, R. C. Articles by Bild, D. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Detrano, R. C. Articles by Bild, D. E.

Coronary Calcium Measurements: Effect of CT Scanner Type and Calcium Measure on Rescan Reproducibility—MESA Study¹

¹ From the Div of Cardiology, Los Angeles Biomedical Research Inst, 1124 W Carson St, Bldg E-5, Torrance, CA 90502 (R.C.D.); Dept of Biostatistics, Univ of Washington, Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (M.A., J.N.); Dept of Medicine, Univ of California, Irvine (N.D.W.); Dept of Radiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC (J.J.C.); David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (M.M.G.); and Div of Epidemiology and Clinical Applications, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Md (D.E.B.). Supported by contracts N01-HC-95159-95165 and N01-HC-95159-95169 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Received March 23, 2004; revision requested June 1; revision received August 30; accepted October 15. Address correspondence to R.C.D. (e-mail: rdetrano{at}labiomed.org).

View larger version (72K): [in a new window]   Figure 1. Transverse electron-beam (top) and multi–detector row (Lightspeed Plus) (bottom) CT scans show typical images of heart and of calibration phantom placed appropriately below thorax. Arrows indicate four cylindrical bars containing known concentrations of hydroxyapatite (0, 50, 100 and 200 mg/mL). Image attenuation was adjusted by comparing measured attenuation in bars with predetermined attenuations corresponding to known densities of hydroxyapatite.

View larger version (35K): [in a new window]   Figure 2a. Scatter diagrams show rescan difference plotted against (a) Agatston score, (b) calcium volume, and (c) interpolated volume score for both scans. Rescan differences increase with extent of calcium and are comparable for all three calcium measures. Lines on each diagram show limits of reproducibility and indicate boundaries within which rescan differences fall 95% of the time. Corresponding reproducibility coefficients are 0.226, 0.224, and 0.209 for Agatston score, calcium volume, and interpolated volume score, respectively.

View larger version (34K): [in a new window]   Figure 2b. Scatter diagrams show rescan difference plotted against (a) Agatston score, (b) calcium volume, and (c) interpolated volume score for both scans. Rescan differences increase with extent of calcium and are comparable for all three calcium measures. Lines on each diagram show limits of reproducibility and indicate boundaries within which rescan differences fall 95% of the time. Corresponding reproducibility coefficients are 0.226, 0.224, and 0.209 for Agatston score, calcium volume, and interpolated volume score, respectively.

View larger version (31K): [in a new window]   Figure 2c. Scatter diagrams show rescan difference plotted against (a) Agatston score, (b) calcium volume, and (c) interpolated volume score for both scans. Rescan differences increase with extent of calcium and are comparable for all three calcium measures. Lines on each diagram show limits of reproducibility and indicate boundaries within which rescan differences fall 95% of the time. Corresponding reproducibility coefficients are 0.226, 0.224, and 0.209 for Agatston score, calcium volume, and interpolated volume score, respectively.