ArticleInternational journal of cardiac imaging1994
Automated extraction, labelling and analysis of the coronary vasculature from arteriograms.
Article in International journal of cardiac imaging, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Coronary artery center-line extraction using second order local features.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2012Article
- Automatic stenosis detection and quantification in renal arteriography.Proceedings : a conference of the American Medical Informatics Association. AMIA Fall Symposium · 1997Article
- What to do with OCA results from multiple angiographic views?International journal of cardiac imaging · 1995Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For clinical decision-making and documentation purposes we have developed techniques to extract, label and analyze the coronary vasculature from arteriograms in an automated, quantitative manner. Advanced image processing techniques were applied to extract and analyze the vasculatures from non-subtracted arteriograms while artificial intelligence techniques were employed to assign anatomical labels. Lumen diameters of 11 phantom vessels were assessed with an accuracy of 0.27 +/- 0.19 mm (dtrue = 0.45 + 0.92dmeasured; r > 0.99) and 0.21 +/- 0.15 mm (dtrue = 0.42 + 0.91dmeasured; r > 0.99), from cine and digital images, respectively. We collected a total of 15 routinely acquired cine-arteriograms showing 74 vessel segments with 18 stenoses (severity larger than 30% assessed quantitatively), and 53 digital arteriograms showing 236 vessel segments with 69 stenoses. From the cine arteriograms we extracted 64 (86%) of the vessel segments without manual correction and 196 (83%) from the digital arteriograms. Repeated analysis (3 times) of the arteriograms by the same operator resulted in a standard deviation of the mean segment diameters (precision) of 0.064 mm for the cine-images and 0.020 mm for the digital images, while the standard deviations in the measurement of the minimal luminal diameter of the observed stenoses were 0.020 mm and 0.019 mm, respectively. The LAD artery, the septal and diagonal branches were correctly identified automatically in 86% of the segments. From these evaluations we conclude that our automated approach provides reliable tools for the assessment of multi-vessel disease, both in an off- and on-line environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
7876660What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.