Literature DB >> 8915721

Reproducibility of quantitative coronary analysis, Assessment of variability due to frame selection, different observers, and different cinefilmless laboratories.

P A Sirnes1, Y Myreng, P Mølstad, S Golf.   

Abstract

Because of limited storage capacity for digital images, angiographic laboratories without cinefilm are dependent on locally performed quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) in clinical studies. In the present study the intra- and interobserver variability, as well as variability between different laboratories and variability due to frame selection was analyzed. A total of 20 coronary lesions were studied in two different laboratories 12 +/- 8 days apart. Images were analyzed on-line and after being transferred to a Cardiac Work Station (CWS). There was no significant difference between the measurement situations. For minimal luminal diameter (MLD) precision (SD of signed errors) ranged from 0.12 mm to 0.20 mm, for reference diameter (RD) from 0.15 mm to 0.28 mm, and for percent diameter stenosis (DS) from 4.2% to 5.8%. Overall relative precision was obtained by normalizing the QCA parameters, as well 11.9% for MLD, 7.0% for RD and 8.5% for DS (p < 0.001, Rd and DS compared to MLD). The overall variability in the interobserver and in the interlaboratory comparisons was 11.2% and 10.4%, respectively (n.s) (n.s.). Thus the variability of QCA performed in cinefilmless, digital laboratories is small, and within a range making it an useful tool for clinical practice and group comparisons in clinical studies. However, the error range of QCA measurements must be taken into consideration when judging results from individual patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8915721     DOI: 10.1007/bf01806223

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Card Imaging        ISSN: 0167-9899


  17 in total

1.  A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association.

Authors:  W G Austen; J E Edwards; R L Frye; G G Gensini; V L Gott; L S Griffith; D C McGoon; M L Murphy; B B Roe
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1975-04       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Accuracy and reproducibility of quantitative coronary arteriography using 6 and 8 French catheters with cine angiographic acquisition.

Authors:  S G Ellis; I M Pinto; M J McGillem; S F DeBoe; M T LeFree; G B Mancini
Journal:  Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn       Date:  1991-01

3.  Variability of quantitative digital subtraction coronary angiography before and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.

Authors:  M L Sanz; J Mancini; M T LeFree; J K Mickelson; M R Starling; R A Vogel; E J Topol
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1987-07-01       Impact factor: 2.778

4.  Assessment of short-, medium-, and long-term variations in arterial dimensions from computer-assisted quantitation of coronary cineangiograms.

Authors:  J H Reiber; P W Serruys; C J Kooijman; W Wijns; C J Slager; J J Gerbrands; J C Schuurbiers; A den Boer; P G Hugenholtz
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1985-02       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Accuracy and precision of quantitative digital coronary arteriography: observer-, short-, and medium-term variabilities.

Authors:  J H Reiber; P M van der Zwet; G Koning; C D von Land; B van Meurs; J J Gerbrands; B Buis; A E van Voorthuisen
Journal:  Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn       Date:  1993-03

Review 7.  Definition and measurement of restenosis after successful coronary angioplasty: implications for clinical trials.

Authors:  J Lespérance; M G Bourassa; L Schwartz; G Hudon; J Laurier; C Eastwood; F Kazim
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 4.749

Review 8.  Technologic considerations and practical limitations in the use of quantitative angiography during percutaneous coronary recanalization.

Authors:  B H Strauss; J Escaned; D P Foley; C di Mario; J Haase; D Keane; W R Hermans; P J de Feyter; P W Serruys
Journal:  Prog Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  1994 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 8.194

9.  Variability in measures of coronary lumen dimensions using quantitative coronary angiography.

Authors:  D M Herrington; M Siebes; D K Sokol; C O Siu; G D Walford
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 24.094

10.  CAAS. II: A second generation system for off-line and on-line quantitative coronary angiography.

Authors:  E Gronenschild; J Janssen; F Tijdens
Journal:  Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn       Date:  1994-09
View more
  4 in total

1.  Validation of an accurate method for three-dimensional reconstruction and quantitative assessment of volumes, lengths and diameters of coronary vascular branches and segments from biplane angiographic projections.

Authors:  E Wellnhofer; A Wahle; I Mugaragu; J Gross; H Oswald; E Fleck
Journal:  Int J Card Imaging       Date:  1999-10

2.  Variability of quantitative coronary angiography: an evaluation of on-site versus core laboratory analysis.

Authors:  Rasmus Moer; Anton W M van Weert; Yngvar Myreng; Per Mølstad
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.357

3.  Inter- and intra-core laboratory variability in the quantitative coronary angiography analysis for drug-eluting stent treatment and follow up.

Authors:  Shigenori Ito; Kanako Kinoshita; Akiko Endo; Ryoko Kami; Yuko Kotake; Masato Nakamura
Journal:  Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec

Review 4.  Implementing Machine Learning in Interventional Cardiology: The Benefits Are Worth the Trouble.

Authors:  Walid Ben Ali; Ahmad Pesaranghader; Robert Avram; Pavel Overtchouk; Nils Perrin; Stéphane Laffite; Raymond Cartier; Reda Ibrahim; Thomas Modine; Julie G Hussin
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-12-08
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.