ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2020
Optimization of HU threshold for coronary artery calcium scans reconstructed at 0.5-mm slice thickness using iterative reconstruction.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Whole-body computed tomography patterns of dystrophic and metastatic soft-tissue calcification in dogs: a multicenter retrospective study.Journal of veterinary science · 2026Article
- Applicability of Effective Atomic Number (Zeff) Image Analysis of Coronary Plaques Measured With Photon- Counting Computed Tomography.Investigative radiology · 2025Article
- Coronary artery calcium mass measurement based on integrated intensity and volume fraction techniques.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2023Article
- Evolving Role of Calcium Density in Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk.JACC. Cardiovascular imaging · 2022Review
- Machine Learning and Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring.Current cardiology reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis work investigated the simultaneous influence of tube voltage, tube current, body size, and HU threshold on calcium scoring reconstructed at 0.5-mm slice thickness using iterative reconstruction (IR) through multivariate analysis. Regression results were used to optimize the HU threshold to calibrate the resulting Agatston scores to be consistent with those obtained from the conventional protocol.
methodsA thorax phantom set simulating three different body sizes was used in this study. A total of 14 coronary artery calcium (CAC) protocols were studied, including 1 conventional protocol reconstructed at 3-mm slice thickness, 1 FBP protocol, and 12 statistical IR protocols (3 kVp values*4 SD values) reconstructed at 0.5-mm slice thickness. Three HU thresholds were applied for calcium identification, including 130, 150, and 170 HU. A multiple linear regression method was used to analyze the impact of kVp, SD, body size, and HU threshold on the Agatston scores of three calcification densities for IR-reconstructed CAC scans acquired with 0.5-mm slice thickness.
resultsEach regression relationship has R
conclusionThe optimized HU thresholds were proposed for CAC scans reconstructed at 0.5-mm slice thickness using IR. Our study results may provide a potential strategy to improve the reliability of calcium scoring by reducing partial volume effect while keeping radiation dose as low as reasonably achievable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.