共 43 条
Performance of visual, manual, and automatic coronary calcium scoring of cardiac 13N-ammonia PET/low dose CT
被引:3
|作者:
Dobrolinska, Magdalena M.
[1
,2
,3
]
Lazarenko, Sergiy, V
[4
]
van der Zant, Friso M.
[4
]
Does, Lonneke
[4
]
van der Werf, Niels
[5
,6
]
Prakken, Niek H. J.
[1
,2
,3
]
Greuter, Marcel J. W.
[1
,2
,3
,7
]
Slart, Riemer H. J. A.
[1
,2
,3
,8
]
Knol, Remco J. J.
[4
]
机构:
[1] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Med Imaging Ctr, Dept Radiol, NL-9700 RB Groningen, Netherlands
[2] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Med Imaging Ctr, Dept Nucl Med, NL-9700 RB Groningen, Netherlands
[3] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Med Imaging Ctr, Dept Mol Imaging, NL-9700 RB Groningen, Netherlands
[4] Northwest Clin, Dept Nucl Med, Alkmaar, Netherlands
[5] Univ Utrecht, Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Radiol, Utrecht, Netherlands
[6] Erasmus MC, Dept Radiol & Nucl Med, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[7] Univ Twente, Dept Robot & Mechatron, Fac Elect Engn Math & Comp Sci, Enschede, Netherlands
[8] Univ Twente, Fac Sci & Technol, Dept Biomed Photon Imaging, Enschede, Netherlands
关键词:
CAD;
PET;
CT;
Image interpretation;
CARDIOVASCULAR COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY;
2016 SCCT/STR GUIDELINES;
ARTERY CALCIUM;
ATTENUATION CORRECTION;
CALCIFICATION;
DISEASE;
SCANS;
ATHEROSCLEROSIS;
QUANTIFICATION;
PREDICTION;
D O I:
10.1007/s12350-022-03018-0
中图分类号:
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号:
1002 ;
100201 ;
摘要:
Background Coronary artery calcium is a well-known predictor of major adverse cardiac events and is usually scored manually from dedicated, ECG-triggered calcium scoring CT (CSCT) scans. In clinical practice, a myocardial perfusion PET scan is accompanied by a non-ECG triggered low dose CT (LDCT) scan. In this study, we investigated the accuracy of patients' cardiovascular risk categorisation based on manual, visual, and automatic AI calcium scoring using the LDCT scan. Methods We retrospectively enrolled 213 patients. Each patient received a N-13-ammonia PET scan, an LDCT scan, and a CSCT scan as the gold standard. All LDCT and CSCT scans were scored manually, visually, and automatically. For the manual scoring, we used vendor recommended software (Syngo.via, Siemens). For visual scoring a 6-points risk scale was used (0; 1-10; 11-100; 101-400; 401-100; > 1 000 Agatston score). The automatic scoring was performed with deep learning software (Syngo.via, Siemens). All manual and automatic Agatston scores were converted to the 6-point risk scale. Manual CSCT scoring was used as a reference. Results The agreement of manual and automatic LDCT scoring with the reference was low [weighted kappa 0.59 (95% CI 0.53-0.65); 0.50 (95% CI 0.44-0.56), respectively], but the agreement of visual LDCT scoring was strong [0.82 (95% CI 0.77-0.86)]. Conclusions Compared with the gold standard manual CSCT scoring, visual LDCT scoring outperformed manual LDCT and automatic LDCT scoring.
引用
收藏
页码:239 / 250
页数:12
相关论文