ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2023
Low-dose coronary artery calcium scoring compared to the standard protocol.
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Photon-Counting Chest CT at Radiography-Comparable Dose Levels: Impact on Opportunistic Visual and Semiautomated Coronary Calcium Quantification.Investigative radiology · 2026Article
- Performance of fully automated deep-learning-based coronary artery calcium scoring in ECG-gated calcium CT and non-gated low-dose chest CT.European radiology · 2025Article
- Aortic valve and coronary artery calcium scoring: impact of half- versus standard-dose protocols.La Radiologia medica · 2025Article
- The research advancements on the advantages and limitations of coronary computed tomography angiography at low tube voltage: a literature review.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Review
- Hybrid cardiovascular imaging. A clinical consensus statement of the european association of nuclear medicine (EANM) and the european association of cardiovascular imaging (EACVI) of the ESC.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Review
- Quantification accuracy in photon-counting detector CT for coronary artery calcium score: a pilot study.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2024Article
- Long-axial field-of-view PET/CT for the assessment of inflammation in calcified coronary artery plaques with [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- Computed Tomography-Based Coronary Artery Calcium Score Calculation at a Reduced Tube Voltage Utilizing Iterative Reconstruction and Threshold Modification Techniques: A Feasibility Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The power of zero calcium in 82-Rubidium PET irrespective of sex and age.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023Article
- Low-dose coronary calcium scoring tarnishes power of zero.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to compare coronary artery calcium scoring (CACS) with computed tomography (CT) with 80 and 120 kVp in a large patient population and to establish whether there is a difference in risk classification between the two scores.
methodsPatients with suspected CAD undergoing MPS were included. All underwent standard CACS assessment with 120-kVp tube voltage and with 80 kVp. Two datasets (low-dose and standard) were generated and compared. Risk classes (0 to 25, 25 to 50, 50 to 75, 75 to 90, and > 90%) were recorded.
results1511 patients were included (793 males, age 69 ± 9.1 years). There was a very good correlation between scores calculated with 120 and 80 kVp (R = 0.94, R
conclusionIn a large patient population, despite a good correlation between CACS calculated with standard and low-dose CT, there is a systematic underestimation of CACS with the low-dose protocol. This may have an impact especially on the prognostic value of the calcium score, and the established "power of zero" may no longer be warranted if CACS is assessed with low-dose CT.
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.