References
- Austen W. G., Edwards J. E., Frye R. L., et al. 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. Circulation 1975; 51: 7
- Bove A. A., Holmes D. R., Owen R. M., et al. Estimation of the effects of angioplasty on coronary stenosis using quantitative video angiography. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Diagn 1985; 11: 5
- DeRouen T. A., Murry J. A., Owen W. Variability in the analysis of coronary arteriograms. Circulation 1977; 55: 324
- Detre K. M., Wright E., Murphy M. L., et al. Observer agreement in evaluating coronary angiograms. Circulation 1975; 52: 979
- Fisher L. D., Judkins M. P., Lesperance J., et al. Reproducibility of coronary arteriographic reading in the coronary artery surgery study (CASS). Cathet. Cardiovasc. Diagn 1982; 8: 565
- Katritsis D., Lythall D. A., Cooper I. C., et al. Assessment of coronary angioplasty. Comparison of visual assessment, hand-held caliper measurement and automated digital quantitation. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Diagn 1988; 15: 237
- Scoblionko D. P., Brown B. G., Mitten S., et al. A new digital electronic caliper for measurement of coronary arterial stenosis. Comparison with visual estimates and computer-assisted measurements. Am. J. Cardiol 1984; 53: 689
- Sugahara T., Yanagihara Y., Sugimoto N., et al. Computeraided interpretation of coronary cineangiograms. Accuracy of automatic detection of stenosis lesions. Acta Radiol 1991; 32: 6
- Vas R., Eigler N., Miyazono C., et al. Digital quantification eliminates intraobserver and interobserver variability in the evaluation of coronary artery stenosis. Am. J. Cardiol 1985; 56: 718
- Zir L. M., Miller S. W., Dinsmore R. D., et al. Interobserver variability in coronary angiography. Circulation 1976; 53: 627