Coronary DiseaseNCT00001836
Detection of Coronary Artery Calcification: Comparison of Volumetric and Electron Beam Computed Tomography
An observational study of Coronary Disease, run by National Institutes of Health Clinical Center (CC) at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Electron beam computed tomography (EBCT) has been regarded as the state-of-the-art investigation for detecting and quantitating coronary artery calcification. However, EBCT is expensive, and the asymmetric gantry geometry makes it less useful for routine scanning; thus, EBCT is not readily available to the general… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Coronary Disease
- How many people
- 213 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Oct 1998to Nov 2001
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Must have known or suspected coronary artery calcification, including subjects of age equal to or greater than 55 years (men), or 65 years (women).
Must be at increased risk for CAD. (Chronic hypertension greater than 140/90, cholesterolemia greater than 130 mg/dl, active cigarette smoker, or diabetes mellitus.)
Must be 18 years of age or older.
Females must not be pregnant or considering pregnancy and must not be lactating.
Must not have any surgical devices which may interfere with imaging: heart valves, pacemakers, sternal wire sutures, epicardial pacer leads, metallic coronary stents.
Must not have tachycardia greater than 90 bpm at time of scanning, or other fast or irregular rhythm.
Must not be obese. Patients weighing more than 300 pounds will be excluded since this is the table weight limit for the EBCT scanner.
Must be able to suspend respiration for 28 seconds at time of scanning.
Must be able to give informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Warren G. Magnuson Clinical Center (CC)
Bethesda, Maryland, 20892
About this study
Electron beam computed tomography (EBCT) has been regarded as the state-of-the-art investigation for detecting and quantitating coronary artery calcification. However, EBCT is expensive, and the asymmetric gantry geometry makes it less useful for routine scanning; thus, EBCT is not readily available to the general population. Recent reports have shown that "volumetric" (also known as "helical" or "spiral") scanners, which are much more commonly available than EBCT, can detect coronary artery calcifications. Updated software available to the NIH which will allow for EKG gating of volumetric scans should improve the quality of the images, and thus improve the ability to accurately quantitate coronary calcification by volumetric scanners. We would like to compare the results of volumetric scans with that of standard EBCT in order to characterize similarities and differences between the two scanning techniques. We propose to obtain EBCT and volumetric CT scans of the coronary arteries in a group of patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease and to calculate the calcium score by each method. Our primary analysis will be a comparison of the sensitivities of the two methods.
Read the detailed description
Electron beam computed tomography (EBCT) has been regarded as the state-of-the-art investigation for detecting and quantitating coronary artery calcification. However, EBCT is expensive, and the asymmetric gantry geometry makes it less useful for routine scanning; thus, EBCT is not readily available to the general population. Recent reports have shown that "volumetric" (also known as "helical" or "spiral") scanners, which are much more commonly available than EBCT, can detect coronary artery calcifications. Updated software available to the NIH which will allow for EKG gating of volumetric scans should improve the quality of the images, and thus improve the ability to accurately quantitate coronary calcification by volumetric scanners. We would like to compare the results of volumetric scans with that of standard EBCT in order to characterize similarities and differences between the two scanning techniques. We propose to obtain EBCT and volumetric CT scans of the coronary arteries in a group of patients with known or suspected coronary artery calcification, including subjects of sufficiently advanced age, and to calculate the calcium score by each method. Our primary analysis will be a comparison of the sensitivities of the two methods.
- Conditions
- Coronary Disease
- Keywords
- Coronary Artery Disease, EBCT, Volumetric Scan, Coronary Artery Calcium, Prospective Gating
- Medical subject headings
- Coronary Disease, Coronary Artery Disease
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Nov 1999 (estimated)
- Study startOct 1998
- Study completionNov 2001
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Coronary DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Enrolment
- 213 participants
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- National Institutes of Health Clinical Center (CC)
- Sponsor type
- US National Institutes of Health
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00001836
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 990001
- Other IDs
- 99-CC-0001
- Status last verified
- Nov 2001
- First submitted
- 3 Nov 1999
- Last updated
- 4 Mar 2008
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Breen JF, Sheedy PF 2nd, Schwartz RS, Stanson AW, Kaufmann RB, Moll PP, Rumberger JA. Coronary artery calcification detected with ultrafast CT as an indication of coronary artery disease. Radiology. 1992 Nov;185(2):435-9. doi: 10.1148/radiology.185.2.1410350.
PubMed 1410350Kaufmann RB, Sheedy PF 2nd, Breen JF, Kelzenberg JR, Kruger BL, Schwartz RS, Moll PP. Detection of heart calcification with electron beam CT: interobserver and intraobserver reliability for scoring quantification. Radiology. 1994 Feb;190(2):347-52. doi: 10.1148/radiology.190.2.8284380.
PubMed 8284380Shemesh J, Apter S, Rozenman J, Lusky A, Rath S, Itzchak Y, Motro M. Calcification of coronary arteries: detection and quantification with double-helix CT. Radiology. 1995 Dec;197(3):779-83. doi: 10.1148/radiology.197.3.7480756.
PubMed 7480756
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 4 Mar 2008. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Detection of Coronary Artery Calcification: Comparison of Volumetric and Electron Beam Computed Tomography
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00001836
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 990001
- Conditions
- Coronary Disease
- Keywords
- Coronary Artery Disease, EBCT, Volumetric Scan, Coronary Artery Calcium, Prospective Gating
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 213 participants
- Lead sponsor
- National Institutes of Health Clinical Center (CC)US National Institutes of Health
- Study start
- Oct 1998
- Study completion
- Nov 2001
- First posted
- 4 Nov 1999 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Electron beam computed tomography (EBCT) has been regarded as the state-of-the-art investigation for detecting and quantitating coronary artery calcification. However, EBCT is expensive, and the asymmetric gantry geometry makes it less useful for routine scanning; thus, EBCT is not readily available to the general population. Recent reports have shown that "volumetric" (also known as "helical" or "spiral") scanners, which are much more commonly available than EBCT, can detect coronary artery calcifications. Updated software available to the NIH which will allow for EKG gating of volumetric scans should improve the quality of the images, and thus improve the ability to accurately quantitate coronary calcification by volumetric scanners. We would like to compare the results of volumetric scans with that of standard EBCT in order to characterize similarities and differences between the two scanning techniques. We propose to obtain EBCT and volumetric CT scans of the coronary arteries in a group of patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease and to calculate the calcium score by each method. Our primary analysis will be a comparison of the sensitivities of the two methods.
Detailed description
Electron beam computed tomography (EBCT) has been regarded as the state-of-the-art investigation for detecting and quantitating coronary artery calcification. However, EBCT is expensive, and the asymmetric gantry geometry makes it less useful for routine scanning; thus, EBCT is not readily available to the general population. Recent reports have shown that "volumetric" (also known as "helical" or "spiral") scanners, which are much more commonly available than EBCT, can detect coronary artery calcifications. Updated software available to the NIH which will allow for EKG gating of volumetric scans should improve the quality of the images, and thus improve the ability to accurately quantitate coronary calcification by volumetric scanners. We would like to compare the results of volumetric scans with that of standard EBCT in order to characterize similarities and differences between the two scanning techniques. We propose to obtain EBCT and volumetric CT scans of the coronary arteries in a group of patients with known or suspected coronary artery calcification, including subjects of sufficiently advanced age, and to calculate the calcium score by each method. Our primary analysis will be a comparison of the sensitivities of the two methods.
Study design
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Not reported in the source record.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 4 Mar 2008.
- Background: PubMed 1410350Breen JF, Sheedy PF 2nd, Schwartz RS, Stanson AW, Kaufmann RB, Moll PP, Rumberger JA. Coronary artery calcification detected with ultrafast CT as an indication of coronary artery disease. Radiology. 1992 Nov;185(2):435-9. doi: 10.1148/radiology.185.2.1410350.
- Background: PubMed 8284380Kaufmann RB, Sheedy PF 2nd, Breen JF, Kelzenberg JR, Kruger BL, Schwartz RS, Moll PP. Detection of heart calcification with electron beam CT: interobserver and intraobserver reliability for scoring quantification. Radiology. 1994 Feb;190(2):347-52. doi: 10.1148/radiology.190.2.8284380.
- Background: PubMed 7480756Shemesh J, Apter S, Rozenman J, Lusky A, Rath S, Itzchak Y, Motro M. Calcification of coronary arteries: detection and quantification with double-helix CT. Radiology. 1995 Dec;197(3):779-83. doi: 10.1148/radiology.197.3.7480756.
Related trials for Coronary Disease
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Stress Ball Use During Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal After Coronary Angiography
Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal, Stress Ball
Active, not recruiting
Shockwave™ vs Surgical Endarterectomy for Calcified Severe Common Femoral Artery Stenosis: Comparison of Efficacy, Safety and Long-Term Outcomes
Common Femoral Artery Stenosis, Calcification; Heart
RecruitingObservational study
AI-powered ECG Analysis Using Willem™ Software in High-risk Cardiac Patients (WILLEM)
Cardiomyopathies, Cardiac Arrest
RecruitingPhase 4
The Effects of Ferric Derisomaltose in Patients With Acute Heart Failure and Iron Deficiency on Exercise Capacity and Quality of Life(COREVIVE-HFrEF)
Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction, Iron Deficiency
Recruiting
Trial of the F2 Filter and Delivery System for Embolic Protection During TAVR
Aortic Stenosis Treated With TAVI, Aortic Diseases
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Coronary Disease, run by National Institutes of Health Clinical Center (CC) at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 4 Mar 2008. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00001836, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 4 Mar 2008.