ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2022
Reproducibility of coronary artery calcium quantification on dual-source CT and dual-source photon-counting CT: a dynamic phantom study.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Coronary artery calcium scoring: expanding the new standard by photon-counting detector CT Part II: Impact of virtual monoenergetic image reconstructions with adjusted calcium scoring thresholds.European radiology · 2026Article
- Impact of slice thickness on CACS calculation with virtual non-contrast in photon-counting CT.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Multiphase aortic valve calcium scoring on true-non-contrast and calcium-preserving spectral reconstructions using dual-source photon-counting detector CT.European radiology · 2026Article
- Impact of vessel size, dose levels, and body habitus on iodine quantification in cardiovascular photon-counting computed tomography.The British journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Applicability of Effective Atomic Number (Zeff) Image Analysis of Coronary Plaques Measured With Photon- Counting Computed Tomography.Investigative radiology · 2025Article
- Effect of temporal resolution on calcium scoring: insights from photon-counting detector CT.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Article
- Technical principles, benefits, challenges, and applications of photon counting computed tomography in coronary imaging: a narrative review.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2024Review
- Improved Detection of Small and Low-Density Plaques in Virtual Noncontrast Imaging-based Calcium Scoring at Photon-Counting Detector CT.Radiology. Cardiothoracic imaging · 2024Article
- Heart rate sensitivity of virtual non-contrast calcium scores derived from photon counting detector CT data: a phantom study.La Radiologia medica · 2024Article
- Article
- Cardiac Virtual Noncontrast Images for Calcium Quantification with Photon-counting Detector CT.Radiology. Cardiothoracic imaging · 2023Article
- Photon-counting CT of elbow joint fractures: image quality in a simulated post-trauma setting with off-center positioning.European radiology experimental · 2023Article
- An introduction to photon-counting detector CT (PCD CT) for radiologists.Japanese journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Current role of coronary calcium in younger population and future prospects with photon counting technology.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To systematically compare coronary artery calcium (CAC) quantification between conventional computed tomography (CT) and photon-counting CT (PCCT) at different virtual monoenergetic (monoE) levels for different heart rates. A dynamic (heart rates of 0, < 60, 60-75, and > 75 bpm) anthropomorphic phantom with three calcification densities was scanned using routine clinical CAC protocols with CT and PCCT. In addition to the standard clinical protocol of 70 keV, PCCT images were reconstructed at monoE levels of 72, 74, and 76 keV. CAC was quantified using Agatston, volume, and mass scores. Agatston scores 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated and compared between PCCT and CT. Volume and mass scores were compared with physical quantities. For all CAC densities, routine clinical protocol Agatston scores of static CAC were higher for PCCT compared to CT. At < 60 bpm, Agatston scores at 74 and 76 keV reconstructions were reproducible (overlapping CI) for PCCT and CT. Increased heart rates yielded different Agatston scores for PCCT in comparison with CT, for all monoE levels. Low density CAC volume scores showed the largest deviation from physical volume, with mean deviations of 59% and 77% for CT and PCCT, respectively. Overall, mass scores underestimated physical mass by 10%, 38%, and 59% for low, medium, and high density CAC, respectively. PCCT allows for reproducible Agatston scores for dynamic CAC (< 60 bpm) when reconstructed at monoE levels of 74 or 76 keV, regardless of CAC density. Deviations from physical volume and mass were, in general, large for both CT and PCCT.
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.