Dataset Information

Computed tomography aortic valve calcium scoring for the assessment of aortic stenosis progression.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

CT quantification of aortic valve calcification (CT-AVC) is useful in the assessment of aortic stenosis severity. Our objective was to assess its ability to track aortic stenosis progression compared with echocardiography.

Methods

Subjects were recruited in two cohorts: (1) a reproducibility cohort where patients underwent repeat CT-AVC or echocardiography within 4 weeks and (2) a disease progression cohort where patients underwent annual CT-AVC and/or echocardiography. Cohen's d-statistic (d) was computed from the ratio of annualised progression and measurement repeatability and used to estimate group sizes required to detect annualised changes in CT-AVC and echocardiography.

Results

A total of 33 (age 71±8) and 81 participants (age 72±8) were recruited to the reproducibility and progression cohorts, respectively. Ten CT scans (16%) were excluded from the progression cohort due to non-diagnostic image quality. Scan-rescan reproducibility was excellent for CT-AVC (limits of agreement -12% to 10 %, intraclass correlation (ICC) 0.99), peak velocity (-7% to +17%; ICC 0.92) mean gradient (-25% to 27%, ICC 0.96) and dimensionless index (-11% to +15%; ICC 0.98). Repeat measurements of aortic valve area (AVA) were less reliable (-44% to +28%, ICC 0.85).CT-AVC progressed by 152 (65-375) AU/year. For echocardiography, the median annual change in peak velocity was 0.1 (0.0-0.3) m/s/year, mean gradient 2 (0-4) mm Hg/year and AVA -0.1 (-0.2-0.0) cm²/year. Cohen's d-statistic was more than double for CT-AVC (d=3.12) than each echocardiographic measure (peak velocity d=0.71 ; mean gradient d=0.66; AVA d=0.59, dimensionless index d=1.41).

Conclusion

CT-AVC is reproducible and demonstrates larger increases over time normalised to measurement repeatability compared with echocardiographic measures.

SUBMITTER: Doris MK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7719911 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveWe aimed to develop a prediction model for diagnosing severe aortic stenosis (AS) using computed tomography (CT) radiomics features of aortic valve calcium (AVC) and machine learning (ML) algorithms.Materials and methodsWe retrospectively enrolled 408 patients who underwent cardiac CT between March 2010 and August 2017 and had echocardiographic examinations (240 patients with severe AS on echocardiography [the severe AS group] and 168 patients without severe AS [the non-severe AS group]). Data were divided into a training set (312 patients) and a validation set (96 patients). Using non-contrast-enhanced cardiac CT scans, AVC was segmented, and 128 radiomics features for AVC were extracted. After feature selection was performed with three ML algorithms (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator [LASSO], random forests [RFs], and eXtreme Gradient Boosting [XGBoost]), model classifiers for diagnosing severe AS on echocardiography were developed in combination with three different model classifier methods (logistic regression, RF, and XGBoost). The performance (c-index) of each radiomics prediction model was compared with predictions based on AVC volume and score.ResultsThe radiomics scores derived from LASSO were significantly different between the severe AS and non-severe AS groups in the validation set (median, 1.563 vs. 0.197, respectively, p < 0.001). A radiomics prediction model based on feature selection by LASSO + model classifier by XGBoost showed the highest c-index of 0.921 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.869-0.973) in the validation set. Compared to prediction models based on AVC volume and score (c-indexes of 0.894 [95% CI, 0.815-0.948] and 0.899 [95% CI, 0.820-0.951], respectively), eight and three of the nine radiomics prediction models showed higher discrimination abilities for severe AS. However, the differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05 for all).ConclusionModels based on the radiomics features of AVC and ML algorithms may perform well for diagnosing severe AS, but the added value compared to AVC volume and score should be investigated further.

Project description:Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the standard treatment for aortic stenosis in older patients. It increasingly relies on accurate pre-procedural planning using multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). Since little is known about the required competence levels for MDCT analyses, we comprehensively assessed MDCT TAVR planning reproducibility and accuracy with regard to valve selection in various healthcare workers. 20 randomly selected MDCT of TAVR patients were analyzed using dedicated software by healthcare professionals with varying backgrounds and experience (two structural interventionalists, one imaging specialist, one cardiac surgeon, one general physician, and one medical student). Following the analysis, the most appropriate Edwards SAPIEN 3™ and Medtronic CoreValve valve size was selected. Intra- and inter-observer variability were assessed. The first structural interventionalist was considered as reference standard for inter-observer comparison. Excellent intra- and inter-observer variability was found for the entire group in regard to the MDCT measurements. The best intra-observer agreement and reproducibility were found for the structural interventionalist, while the medical student had the lowest reproducibility. The highest inter-observer agreement was between both structural interventionalists, followed by the imaging specialist. As to valve size selection, the structural interventionalist showed the highest intra-observer reproducibility, independent of the brand of valve used. Compared to the reference structural interventionalist, the second structural interventionalist showed the highest inter-observer agreement for valve size selection [ICC 0.984, 95% CI 0.969-0.991] followed by the cardiac surgeon [ICC 0.947, 95%CI 0.900-0.972]. The lowest inter-observer agreement was found for the medical student [ICC 0.507, 95%CI 0.067-0.739]. While current state-of-the-art MDCT analysis software provides excellent reproducibility for anatomical measurements, the highest levels of confidence in terms of valve size selection were achieved by the performing interventional physicians. This was most likely attributable to observer experience.