PurposeAgatston 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. ApproachIntegrated 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 with 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. ResultsBoth 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: 0.49 mg, RMSD: 0.49 mg) and volume fraction calcium mass (RMSE: 0.58 mg, RMSD: 0.57 mg) were more accurate for the low-density stationary calcium measurements than Agatston scoring (RMSE: 3.70 mg, RMSD: 2.30 mg). Similarly, integrated calcium mass (15.74%) and volume fraction calcium mass (20.37%) had fewer false-negative (CAC = 0) measurements than Agatston scoring (75.00%) and spatially weighted calcium scoring (26.85%), on the low-density stationary calcium measurements. ConclusionThe 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 with Agatston scoring.
|
