title: Reproducibility of noncalcified coronary artery plaque burden quantification from coronary CT angiography across different image analysis platforms.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The objective of our study was to evaluate the reproducibility of noncalcified coronary artery plaque burden quantification from coronary CT angiography (CTA) across different commercial analysis platforms.
  
  
  METHODS
  For this study, 47 patients (36 men, 11 women; mean age ± SD, 62 ± 13 years) with noncalcified plaques on coronary CTA were included. Automated quantification of noncalcified coronary artery plaque volume was performed on identical datasets using three commercially available image analysis software platforms (software platforms 1-3). Identical tissue attenuation ranges between 0 and 50 HU for low-attenuation plaques and 50-130 HU for medium-attenuation plaques were consistently applied. Log volume data were compared with the Pearson correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman analysis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Differences in plaque volume measurements on intraplatform repeat measurements were statistically insignificant (p = 0.923). At the low-attenuation threshold, software platform 3 had significantly higher log volumes (p < 0.001) than both software platforms 1 and 2 and software platform 1 had significantly higher log volumes than software platform 2 (p < 0.001). The results at the medium-attenuation level were identical except that the log volumes for software platforms 1 and 2 were not significantly different (p > 0.05) in the left anterior descending artery and left circumflex artery. The Pearson correlation coefficient was found to be 0.677 (p < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.608-0.735) between software platforms 1 and 2, 0.672 (p < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.603-0.732) between software platforms 1 and 3, and 0.550 (p < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.463-0.627) between software platforms 2 and 3.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Currently available noncalcified plaque quantification software provides good intraplatform reproducibility but poor interplatform reproducibility. Serial or comparative assessments require evaluation using the same software. Industry standards should be developed to enable reproducible assessments across manufacturers.
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, 25 Courtenay Dr, Ashley River Tower, Charleston, SC 29425.
authors.forename: Shane
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Oberoi
authors.forename: Felix G
authors.initials: FG
authors.lastname: Meinel
authors.forename: U Joseph
authors.initials: UJ
authors.lastname: Schoepf
authors.forename: John W
authors.initials: JW
authors.lastname: Nance
authors.forename: Carlo N
authors.initials: CN
authors.lastname: De Cecco
authors.forename: Mulugeta
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Gebregziabher
authors.forename: Philip
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Costello
authors.forename: Markus
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Weininger
mesh_terms: D003287:Contrast Media; D017023:Coronary Angiography / Q000379:methods*; D003327:Coronary Disease / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D058226:Plaque, Atherosclerotic / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D011857:Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012984:Software; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods*
chemical_list: D003287:Contrast Media