Abstract
Purpose Agatston scoring does not detect all the calcium present in computed tomography scans of the heart. A technique that removes the need for thresholding and quantifies calcium mass more accurately and reproducibly is needed.
Approach Integrated intensity and volume fraction techniques were evaluated for accurate quantification of calcium mass. Integrated intensity calcium mass, volume fraction calcium mass, Agatston scoring and spatially weighted calcium scoring were compared to known calcium mass in simulated and physical phantoms. The simulation was created to match a 320-slice CT scanner. Fat rings were added to the simulated phantoms, which resulted in small (30×20 cm2), medium (35×25 cm2), and large (40×30 cm2) phantoms. Three calcification inserts of different diameters and hydroxyapatite densities were placed within the phantoms. All the calcium mass measurements were repeated across different beam energies, patient sizes, insert sizes, and densities. Physical phantom images from a previously reported study were then used to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of the techniques.
Results Both integrated intensity calcium mass and volume fraction calcium mass yielded lower root mean squared error (RMSE) and deviation (RMSD) values than Agatston scoring in all the measurements in the simulated phantoms. Specifically, integrated calcium mass (RMSE: 0.50 mg, RMSD: 0.49 mg) and volume fraction calcium mass (RMSE: 0.59 mg, RMSD: 0.58 mg) were more accurate for the low-density calcium measurements than Agatston scoring (RMSE: 3.5 mg, RMSD: 2.2 mg). Similarly, integrated calcium mass (9.72%) and volume fraction calcium mass (10.19%) had fewer false-negative (CAC=0) measurements than Agatston scoring (38.89%).
Conclusion The integrated calcium mass and volume fraction calcium mass techniques can potentially improve risk stratification for patients undergoing calcium scoring and further improve risk assessment compared to Agatston scoring.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
A grant from Canon Medical Systems, USA, partially supported this study.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
https://github.com/Dale-Black/CalciumScoring.jl
