Validation of 4 French Catheters for Quantitative Coronary Analysis: In Vivo Variability Assessment Using 6 French Guiding Catheters as Reference Scaling Devices

Journal of Invasive Cardiology

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 113-116

  Sanmartin, Marcelo ^a   Goicolea, Javier ^a   Castellanos, Raul ^a   Bravo, Marisol ^a   Ocaranza, Raymundo ^a   Cuevas, Diogenes ^a   Mantilla, Ramon ^a   Ruiz Salmeron, Rafael ^a  

^a HOSPITAL DO MEIXOEIRO   (Spain)

Author keywords

Catheterization; Coronary artery disease; Quantitative coronary angiography

Indexed keywords

GLYCERYL TRINITRATE; IOHEXOL; NONIONIC CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CATHETER; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HUMAN; INTRACORONARY INFUSION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS;

CATHETERIZATION; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY STENOSIS; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HUMANS; NITROGLYCERIN; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REFERENCE VALUES;

EID: 1542343902     PISSN: 10423931     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Brown BG, Bolson EL, Dodge HT. Quantitative computer techniques for analyzing coronary arteriograms. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1986;28:403.
2. Reiber JH, Kooijman CJ, Slager CJ, et al. Coronary artery dimensions from cineangiograms: Methodology and validation of a computer-assisted analysis procedure. IEEE Trans Med Imag 1984;3:131-141.
3. Gobeil F, Lefevre T, Louvard Y, et al. Coronary angioplasty using 5 French guiding catheters: Preliminary experience. Cathet Cardiovasc Intervent 2000;51:107-109.
4. Metz D, Chapoutot L, Brasselet C, Jolly D. Randomized evaluation of four versus five French catheters for transfemoral coronary angiography. Clin Cardiol 1999;22:29-32.
5. Khoukaz S, Kern MJ, Bitar SR, et al. Coronary angiography using 4 Fr catheters with Acisted Power injection: A randomized comparison to 6 Fr, manual technique and early ambulation. Cathet Cardiovasc Intervent 2001;52:393-398.
6. Chahoud G, Khoukaz S, El-Shafei A, et al. Randomized comparison of coronary angiography using 4 F catheters: 4 F manual versus "Acisted" power injection technique. Cathet Cardiovasc Intervent 2001;53:221-224.
7. Todd DM, Hubner PJ, Hudson N, et al. Multicentre, prospective, randomized trial of 4 versus 6 French catheters in 410 patients undergoing coronary angiography. Cathet Cardiovasc Intervent 2001;54:269-275.
8. Kiemeneij F, Laarman GJ, Odekerken D, et al. A randomized comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by the radial, brachial and femoral approaches: The ACCESS Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;29:1269-1275.
9. Finet G, Liénard J. Parameters that influence accuracy and precision of quantitative coronary arteriography. Int J Cardiac Imag 1996;12:271-287.
10. Mancini GB, Simon SB, McGillem MJ, et al. Automated quantitative coronary artetiography: Morphologic and physiologic validation in vivo of a rapid digital angiographic method. Circulation 1987;75:452-460.
11. Reiber JH, Kooijman CJ, Slager CJ, et al. Coronary artery dimensions from cineangiograms: Methodology and validation of a computer-assisted analysis procedure. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1984;3:131-141.
12. Legrand V, Raskinet B, Martinez C, Kulbertus H. Variability in estimation or coronary dimensions from 6 and 8 F catheters. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1996;37:39-45.
13. Haase J, Escaned J, van Swijndregt EM, et al. Experimental validation of geometric and densitometric coronary measurements on the new generation cardiovascular angiography analysis system (CAAS II). Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1993;30:104-114.
14. Reiber JH, van der Zwet PM, Koning G, et al. Accuracy and precision of quantitative digital coronary arteriography: Observer-, short-, and medium term variabilities. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1993;28:187-198.
15. Liénard J, Sureda F, Finet G. The 6-sigma quality approach for quantitative arteriography performance improvement. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2002;18:77-92.