IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0148904.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantification of Calcium Amount in a New Experimental Model: A Comparison between Ultrasound and Computed Tomography

Author

Listed:
  • Kris Gillis
  • Gezim Bala
  • Bram Roosens
  • Isabel Remory
  • Sophie Hernot
  • Steven Droogmans
  • Bernard Cosyns

Abstract

Purpose: Calcification is an important prognostic factor in aortic valve stenosis. However, there is no ultrasound (US) method available to accurately quantify calcification in this setting to date. We aimed to validate a new US method for measuring the amount of calcium in an in vitro model, and compare it to computed tomography (CT), the current imaging gold standard. Materials and Methods: An agar phantom (2% agar) was made, containing 9 different amounts of calcium-hydroxyapatite Ca5(PO4)3OH (2 to 50mg). The phantoms were imaged with micro-CT and US (10 MHz probe). The calcium area (areacalcium) and its maximum pixel value (PVmax) were obtained. These values were summed to calculate CT and US calcium scores (∑(areacalcium × PVmax)) and volumes (∑areacalcium). Both US- and CT-calcium scores were compared with the calcium amounts, and with each other. Results: Both calcium scores correlated significantly with the calcium amount (R2 = 0.9788, p

Suggested Citation

  • Kris Gillis & Gezim Bala & Bram Roosens & Isabel Remory & Sophie Hernot & Steven Droogmans & Bernard Cosyns, 2016. "Quantification of Calcium Amount in a New Experimental Model: A Comparison between Ultrasound and Computed Tomography," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-15, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0148904
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148904
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0148904
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0148904&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0148904?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0148904. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.