scholarly journals Improved coronary calcification quantification using photon-counting-detector CT: an ex vivo study in cadaveric specimens

Author(s):  
Mårten Sandstedt ◽  
Jeffrey Marsh ◽  
Kishore Rajendran ◽  
Hao Gong ◽  
Shengzhen Tao ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Susann Skoog ◽  
Lilian Henriksson ◽  
Håkan Gustafsson ◽  
Mårten Sandstedt ◽  
Sebastian Elvelind ◽  
...  

AbstractThe purpose of this study was to compare the correlation and agreement between AS derived from either an energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT) or a photon-counting detector CT (PCD-CT). Reproducibility was also compared. In total, 26 calcified coronary lesions (from five cadaveric hearts) were identified for inclusion. The hearts were positioned in a chest phantom and scanned in both an EID-CT and a prototype PCD-CT. The EID-CT and PCD-CT acquisition and reconstruction parameters were matched. To evaluate the reproducibility, the phantom was manually repositioned, and an additional scan was performed using both methods. The EID-CT reconstructions were performed using the dedicated calcium score kernel Sa36. The PCD-CT reconstructions were performed with a vendor-recommended kernel (Qr36). Several monoenergetic energy levels (50–150 keV) were evaluated to find the closest match with the EID-CT scans. A semi-automatic evaluation of calcium score was performed on a post-processing multimodality workplace. The best match with Sa36 was PCD-CT Qr36 images, at a monoenergetic level of 72 keV. Statistical analyses showed excellent correlation and agreement. The correlation and agreement with regards to the Agatston score (AS) between the two methods, for each position as well as between the two positions for each method, were assessed with the Spearman´s rank correlation. The correlation coefficient, rho, was 0.98 and 0.97 respectively 0.99 and 0.98. The corresponding agreements were investigated by means of Bland–Altman plots. High correlation and agreement was observed between the AS derived from the EID-CT and a PCD-CT. Both methods also demonstrated excellent reproducibility.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susann Skoog ◽  
Lilian Henriksson ◽  
Håkan Gustafsson ◽  
Mårten Sandstedt ◽  
Sebastian Elvelind ◽  
...  

Abstract The purpose of this study was to compare the correlation and agreement between AS derived from either an energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT) or a photon-counting detector CT (PCD-CT). Reproducibility was also compared. Method In total, 26 calcified coronary lesions (from five cadaveric hearts) were identified for inclusion. The hearts were positioned in a chest phantom and scanned in both an EID-CT and a prototype PCD-CT. The EID-CT and PCD-CT acquisition and reconstruction parameters were matched. To evaluate the reproducibility, the phantom was manually repositioned, and an additional scan was performed using both methods. The EID-CT reconstructions were performed using the dedicated calcium score kernel Sa36. The PCD-CT reconstructions were performed with a vendor-recommended kernel (Qr36). Several monoenergetic energy levels (50-150 keV) were evaluated to find the closest match with the EID-CT scans. A semi-automatic evaluation of calcium score was performed on a post-processing multimodality workplace. Results The best match with Sa36 was PCD-CT Qr36 images, at a monoenergetic level of 72 keV. Statistical analyses showed excellent correlation and agreement. The correlation and agreement with regards to the Agatston score (AS) between the two methods, for each position as well as between the two positions for each method, were assessed with the Spearman´s rank correlation. The correlation coefficient, rho, was 0.98 and 0.97 respectively 0.99 and 0.98. The corresponding agreements were investigated by means of Bland-Altman plots. Conclusion High correlation and agreement was observed between the AS derived from the EID-CT and a PCD-CT. Both methods also demonstrated excellent reproducibility.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafael Heiss ◽  
Frank W. Roemer ◽  
Christoph Lutter ◽  
Rolf Janka ◽  
Volker Schöffl ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klaus Engelke ◽  
Nicolas Bouler ◽  
Oleg Museyko Fuerst ◽  
Sebastien Parratte ◽  
Thomas Fuerst ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 667-670
Author(s):  
Thomas Larrew ◽  
Mohammed Alshareef ◽  
Robert F. Murphy ◽  
Ramin Eskandari ◽  
Libby Kosnik Infinger

OBJECTIVEAlthough the advent of magnetic growing rod technology for scoliosis has provided a means to bypass multiple hardware lengthening operations, it is important to be aware that many of these same patients have a codiagnosis of hydrocephalus with magnet-sensitive programmable ventricular shunts. As the magnetic distraction of scoliosis rods has not previously been described to affect the shunt valve setting, the authors conducted an investigation to characterize the interaction between the two devices.METHODSIn this ex vivo study, the authors carried out 360 encounters between four different shunt valve types at varying distances from the magnetic external remote control (ERC) used to distract the growing rods. Valve settings were examined before and after every interaction with the remote control to determine if there was a change in the setting.RESULTSThe Medtronic Strata and Codman Hakim valves were found to have setting changes at distances of 3 and 6 inches but not at 12 inches. The Aesculap proGAV and Codman Certas valves, typically described as MRI-resistant, did not have any setting changes due to the magnetic ERC regardless of distance.CONCLUSIONSAlthough it is not necessary to check a shunt valve after every magnetic distraction of scoliosis growing rods, if there is concern that the magnetic ERC may have been within 12 inches (30 cm) of a programmable ventricular shunt valve, the valve should be checked at the bedside with a programmer or with a skull radiograph along with postdistraction scoliosis radiographs.


2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. 1615-1621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Andrade-Jorge ◽  
Marycarmen Godínez-Victoria ◽  
Luvia Enid Sánchez-Torres ◽  
Luis Humberto Fabila-Castillo ◽  
José G. Trujillo-Ferrara

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document