Coronary Artery Disease: McCollough CH

Oudkerk M, Stillman AE, Halliburton SS, Kalender WA, Möhlenkamp S, McCollough CH, Vliegenthart R, Shaw LJ, Stanford W, Taylor AJ, van Ooijen PM, Wexler L, Raggi P, Anonymous00008, Anonymous00009. · Department of Radiology, Groningen University Hospital, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands. · Eur Radiol. · Pubmed #18651153 No free full text.

Abstract: Current guidelines and literature on screening for coronary artery calcium for cardiac risk assessment are reviewed for both general and special populations. It is shown that for both general and special populations a zero score excludes most clinically relevant coronary artery disease. The importance of standardization of coronary artery calcium measurements by multidetector CT is discussed.

Oudkerk M, Stillman AE, Halliburton SS, Kalender WA, Möhlenkamp S, McCollough CH, Vliegenthart R, Shaw LJ, Stanford W, Taylor AJ, van Ooijen PM, Wexler L, Raggi P. · Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. · Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. · Pubmed #18504647 links to  free full text

Abstract: Current guidelines and literature on screening for coronary artery calcium for cardiac risk assessment are reviewed for both general and special populations. It is shown that for both general and special populations a zero score excludes most clinically relevant coronary artery disease. The importance of standardization of coronary artery calcium measurements by multi-detector CT is discussed.

McCollough CH, Ulzheimer S, Halliburton SS, Shanneik K, White RD, Kalender WA. · Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. · Radiology. · Pubmed #17456875 links to  free full text

Abstract: PURPOSE: To develop a consensus standard for quantification of coronary artery calcium (CAC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A standard for CAC quantification was developed by a multi-institutional, multimanufacturer international consortium of cardiac radiologists, medical physicists, and industry representatives. This report specifically describes the standardization of scan acquisition and reconstruction parameters, the use of patient size-specific tube current values to achieve a prescribed image noise, and the use of the calcium mass score to eliminate scanner- and patient size-based variations. An anthropomorphic phantom containing calibration inserts and additional phantom rings were used to simulate small, medium-size, and large patients. The three phantoms were scanned by using the recommended protocols for various computed tomography (CT) systems to determine the calibration factors that relate measured CT numbers to calcium hydroxyapatite density and to determine the tube current values that yield comparable noise values. Calculation of the calcium mass score was standardized, and the variance in Agatston, volume, and mass scores was compared among CT systems. RESULTS: Use of the recommended scanning parameters resulted in similar noise for small, medium-size, and large phantoms with all multi-detector row CT scanners. Volume scores had greater interscanner variance than did Agatston and calcium mass scores. Use of a fixed calcium hydroxyapatite density threshold (100 mg/cm(3)), as compared with use of a fixed CT number threshold (130 HU), reduced interscanner variability in Agatston and calcium mass scores. With use of a density segmentation threshold, the calcium mass score had the smallest variance as a function of patient size. CONCLUSION: Standardized quantification of CAC yielded comparable image noise, spatial resolution, and mass scores among different patient sizes and different CT systems and facilitated reduced radiation dose for small and medium-size patients.

Vrtiska TJ, McCollough CH. · Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. · Mayo Clin Proc. · Pubmed #16212153 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

McCollough CH. · Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. · Herz. · Pubmed #12616315 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Computed tomographic (CT) imaging of the heart is becoming more widely available, and the quality of and interest in these examinations continues to increase. Yet, many physicians who perform or order these exams may be unfamiliar with the radiation doses that are delivered to the patient during specific cardiac CT examinations. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to describe several fundamental radiation dose quantities that are used to either measure or report the dose associated with a particular CT examination. In addition, radiation dose estimates are given for coronary artery calcium imaging and coronary angiography performed using either electron beam CT (EBCT) or multi-detector row CT (MDCT) systems.