Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 22, 2026

Two-photon Calcium Imaging in Mice Navigating a Virtual Reality Environment
Published on: February 20, 2014
Impact of slice thickness on CACS calculation with virtual non-contrast in photon-counting CT
Qiuju Hu1, Huixin Zhang1, Bangjun Guo2
1Department of Radiology, Geriatric Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Jiang su Road 65, Nanjing, 210009, China.
Background:
This study aims to investigate the feasibility of coronary artery calcium scoring (CACS) calculating from PureCalcium virtual non-iodine algorithm on photon-counting detector CT (PCD-CT) and the potential impact of different section thickness, level of virtual monoenergetic images (VMIs), and quantum iterative reconstruction (QIR) on the accuracy of CACS quantification.
Materials And Methods:
A total of 123 patients who underwent coronary CT angiography on PCD-CT with a separate true non-contrast CACS (CACSTNC) scan were prospectively included. Agatston scores were calculated from the PureCalcium algorithm (CACSPC) using a section thickness of 3 mm-1.5 mm, different VMI (55-75 kilo-electron volt (keV)) and QIR (strength 1,4) levels, respectively. CACSTNC at 70 keV and QIR 2 were used as reference standards. Differences in CACS of different reconstructions section thicknesses, various keV levels, and QIR strength were compared using the Wilcoxon rank sum test with Bonferroni correction. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman analysis were conducted to assessed the agreement. The agreement of plaque burden groups (based on CACS) at different reconstruction parameters was evaluated using weighted Cohen kappa.
Results:
At all investigated section thickness, VMI, and QIR levels, the CACSPC were strongly correlated with CACSTNC (ICC: 0.94-0.98, P < 0.001 for all). There were no statistical differences in CACS between CACSPC at 3 mm section thickness, 60/65 keV (QIR1/4), and at 1.5 mm section thickness with 55 keV (QIR1/4), compared with CACSTNC. The smallest CACS bias was observed at a 1.5 mm section thickness, 55 keV, QIR 1, with mean bias of 2.4; LoA (IQR: -182.7, 187.4). CACSPC correctly identified 105 of 123 participants (85.4%) into the corresponding plaque burden group using CACSTNC as the referent standard (excellent agreement, κ = 0.904).
Conclusion:
CACS derived from the PureCalcium algorithm with optimized reconstruction parameters shows excellent correlation with true non-contrast scans derived values. Thus, it is may possible to use the PureCalcium virtual non-iodine algorithm to replace the true non-contrast scans for CACS quantification, without additional radiation dose exposure.
Related Concept Videos
Calculating pH Changes in a Buffer Solution
Calculating the Equilibrium Constant
For example, gaseous nitrogen dioxide forms dinitrogen tetroxide according to this equation:
Virtual Work
In static equilibrium, a body can experience an imaginary or virtual movement, such as displacement or rotation. The virtual work done by a force is equal to the dot product of force and virtual displacement in the direction of the force. When it comes to virtually rotating a...
Calculating Standard Free Energy Changes
Numerical Calculations
The solution to a problem is obtained using different methods. While manually solving algebraic symbols is one of the most common methods, the graphical method is often preferred. Computers...
Net Torque Calculations

