Influence of heart rate on coronary calcium scores: a multi-manufacturer phantom study

  • N. R. van der Werf*
  • , M. J. Willemink
  • , Tineke P. Willems
  • , R. Vliegenthart
  • , Marcel J W Greuter
  • , T. Leiner
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

To evaluate the influence of heart rate on coronary calcium scores (CCS) using a dynamic phantom on four high-end computed tomography (CT) systems from different manufacturers. Artificial coronary arteries were moved in an anthropomorphic chest phantom at linear velocities, corresponding to < 60, 60–75 and > 75 beats per minute (bpm). Data was acquired with routinely used clinical protocols for CCS on four high-end CT systems (CT1–CT4). CCS, quantified as Agatston and mass scores were compared to reference scores at < 60 bpm. Influence of heart rate was assessed for each system with the cardiac motion susceptibility (CMS) Index. At increased heart rates (> 75 bpm), Agatston scores of the low mass calcification were similar to the reference score, while Agatston scores of the medium and high mass calcification increased significantly up to 50% for all CT systems. Threefold CMS increases at > 75 bpm in comparison with < 60 bpm were shown. For medium and high mass calcifications, significant differences in CMS between CT systems were found. Heart rate substantially influences CCS for high-end CT systems of four major manufacturers, but CT systems differ in motion susceptibility. Follow-up CCS CT scans should be acquired on the same CT system and protocol, and preferably with comparable heart rates.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)959-966
JournalThe International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
Volume34
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2018

Keywords

  • Agatston score
  • Computed tomography
  • Coronary calcium
  • Heart rate
  • Mass score

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Influence of heart rate on coronary calcium scores: a multi-manufacturer phantom study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this