Departments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd, Suite Metro 203, Los Angeles, CA, 90048, USA.
Department of Interventional Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, Collegium Medicum, University of Zielona Gora, Zielona Gora, Poland.
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022 Oct;49(12):4122-4132. doi: 10.1007/s00259-022-05866-x. Epub 2022 Jun 25.
We sought to evaluate inter-scan and inter-reader agreement of coronary calcium (CAC) scores obtained from dedicated, ECG-gated CAC scans (standard CAC scan) and ultra-low-dose, ungated computed tomography attenuation correction (CTAC) scans obtained routinely during cardiac PET/CT imaging.
From 2928 consecutive patients who underwent same-day Rb cardiac PET/CT and gated CAC scan in the same hybrid PET/CT scanning session, we have randomly selected 200 cases with no history of revascularization. Standard CAC scans and ungated CTAC scans were scored by two readers using quantitative clinical software. We assessed the agreement between readers and between two scan protocols in 5 CAC categories (0, 1-10, 11-100, 101-400, and > 400) using Cohen's Kappa and concordance.
Median age of patients was 70 (inter-quartile range: 63-77), and 46% were male. The inter-scan concordance index and Cohen's Kappa for readers 1 and 2 were 0.69; 0.75 (0.69, 0.81) and 0.72; 0.8 (0.75, 0.85) respectively. The inter-reader concordance index and Cohen's Kappa (95% confidence interval [CI]) was higher for standard CAC scans: 0.9 and 0.92 (0.89, 0.96), respectively, vs. for CTAC scans: 0.83 and 0.85 (0.79, 0.9) for CTAC scans (p = 0.02 for difference in Kappa). Most discordant readings between two protocols occurred for scans with low extent of calcification (CAC score < 100).
CAC can be quantitatively assessed on PET CTAC maps with good agreement with standard scans, however with limited sensitivity for small lesions. CAC scoring of CTAC can be performed routinely without modification of PET protocol and added radiation dose.
我们旨在评估从专用的 ECG 门控冠状动脉钙(CAC)扫描(标准 CAC 扫描)和在心脏 PET/CT 成像期间常规获得的超低剂量非门控 CT 衰减校正(CTAC)扫描获得的 CAC 评分的扫描内和扫描间、读者间的一致性。
从 2928 例同一天接受 Rb 心脏 PET/CT 和门控 CAC 扫描的连续患者中,我们随机选择 200 例无再血管化病史的患者。标准 CAC 扫描和非门控 CTAC 扫描由两位读者使用定量临床软件进行评分。我们使用 Cohen's Kappa 和一致性评估了 5 个 CAC 类别(0、1-10、11-100、101-400 和>400)中读者之间和两种扫描方案之间的一致性。
患者的中位年龄为 70 岁(四分位距:63-77 岁),46%为男性。读者 1 和 2 的扫描内一致性指数和 Cohen's Kappa 分别为 0.69;0.75(0.69,0.81)和 0.72;0.8(0.75,0.85)。标准 CAC 扫描的读者间一致性指数和 Cohen's Kappa(95%置信区间[CI])更高,分别为 0.9 和 0.92(0.89,0.96),而 CTAC 扫描分别为 0.83 和 0.85(0.79,0.9)(p=0.02,Kappa 差异有统计学意义)。两种方案之间差异最大的读数出现在 CAC 评分<100 的低钙化程度的扫描中。
在 PET CTAC 图上可以定量评估 CAC,与标准扫描具有良好的一致性,但对小病变的敏感性有限。无需修改 PET 方案和增加辐射剂量即可常规进行 CTAC 的 CAC 评分。