Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-Ro, Seodaemun-Gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea.
Eur Radiol. 2021 Nov;31(11):8108-8115. doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-07987-7. Epub 2021 Apr 22.
To identify the optimal artery-based method for ordinal grading of coronary artery calcium (CAC) on non-electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated low-dose chest computed tomography (LDCT) among three methods.
A total of 120 asymptomatic subjects who underwent both LDCT and ECG-gated calcium scoring CT on the same day were retrospectively enrolled. Three cardiothoracic radiologists independently assessed CAC severity on LDCT (1.25-mm and 2.5-mm slice thickness) and classified it into four categories (none, mild, moderate, or severe) using three artery-based ordinal scoring methods (extent-based scoring, Weston scoring, and length-based scoring). Inter- and intra-observer CAC severity agreements of each method were assessed by Fleiss kappa statistics. Agreements between each method and ECG-gated calcium scoring CT were assessed by weighted kappa statistics.
The inter-observer agreement was highest with length-based method for both 1.25-mm (Fleiss kappa 0.735 for extent-based method, 0.801 for Weston score, and 0.813 for length-based method) and 2.5-mm slice thickness evaluation (Fleiss kappa 0.755 for extent-based method, 0.776 for Weston score, and 0.833 for extent-based method). Agreement across the three grading methods for the same observer was poor to moderate on 1.25-mm (Fleiss kappa 0.379-0.441) and moderate on 2.5-mm thickness evaluation (Fleiss kappa 0.427-0.461). Agreement of CAC severity between each method and ECG-gated calcium scoring CT was highest with the length-based method for all three observers on both 1.25-mm (weighted kappa 0.773-0.786) and 2.5-mm (weighted kappa 0.794-0.825) LDCT images.
Among the three artery-based ordinal grading methods, the length-based method appears to be the most reliable for evaluating CAC on non-ECG-gated LDCT.
• The length-based method showed the highest inter-observer agreement and the highest agreement with the ECG-gated calcium scoring CT, compared with the extent-based method and the Weston score.
在三种基于动脉的方法中,确定用于非心电图(ECG)门控低剂量胸部计算机断层扫描(LDCT)的冠状动脉钙(CAC)有序分级的最佳动脉方法。
回顾性纳入了 120 名在同一天接受 LDCT 和 ECG 门控钙评分 CT 的无症状受试者。三位心胸放射科医生分别在 LDCT(1.25mm 和 2.5mm 层厚)上评估 CAC 严重程度,并使用三种基于动脉的有序评分方法(基于范围的评分、Weston 评分和基于长度的评分)将其分为四类(无、轻度、中度或重度)。使用 Fleiss kappa 统计评估每种方法的观察者间和观察者内 CAC 严重程度的一致性。使用加权 kappa 统计评估每种方法与 ECG 门控钙评分 CT 的一致性。
对于 1.25mm 切片(基于范围的方法的 Fleiss kappa 为 0.735,Weston 评分的 Fleiss kappa 为 0.801,基于长度的方法的 Fleiss kappa 为 0.813)和 2.5mm 切片厚度评估(基于范围的方法的 Fleiss kappa 为 0.755,Weston 评分的 Fleiss kappa 为 0.776,基于长度的方法的 Fleiss kappa 为 0.833),观察者间的一致性最高。对于同一位观察者,三种分级方法之间的一致性在 1.25mm 时为差至中度(Fleiss kappa 为 0.379-0.441),在 2.5mm 时为中度(Fleiss kappa 为 0.427-0.461)。对于所有三位观察者,基于长度的方法在两种 1.25mm(加权 kappa 为 0.773-0.786)和 2.5mm(加权 kappa 为 0.794-0.825)LDCT 图像上,与 ECG 门控钙评分 CT 的 CAC 严重程度之间的一致性最高。
在三种基于动脉的有序分级方法中,与基于范围的方法和 Weston 评分相比,基于长度的方法似乎是评估非 ECG 门控 LDCT 上 CAC 的最可靠方法。
• 与基于范围的方法和 Weston 评分相比,基于长度的方法在观察者间具有最高的一致性,并且与 ECG 门控钙评分 CT 的一致性最高。