American College of Cardiology/European Society of Cardiology International Study of Angiographic Data Compression Phase I: The effect of lossy data compression on recognition of diagnostic features in digital coronary angiography.

OBJECTIVES This study intended to determine the effect of varying degrees of lossy Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) compression on detection of coronary angiographic features. BACKGROUND Compression of digital coronary angiograms facilitates playback of images and decreases cost. There are little data on the effect of compression on the accuracy of coronary angiography. METHODS At six centers, 71 angiographers each reviewed a set of 100 angiographic sequences. The 100 sequences were divided into four, 25-sequence subsets. Each subset of 25 was displayed either as original images or at one of three compression ratios (CRs) (6:1, 10:1 or 16:1). The effect of lossy compression on the sensitivity and specificity for detection of diagnostic features was determined. The effect of compression on subjective measures of image quality graded by the angiographers was also examined. RESULTS Lossy compression at a ratio of 16:1 decreased the sensitivity for the detection of diagnostic features (76% vs. 80% p = 0.004). The largest effect was in the detection of calcification (52% vs. 63% at 16:1 compression vs. original images, p < 0.001). Subjective indicators of image quality indicated a reduction in confidence in interpretation at CRs of 10:1 and 16:1. CONCLUSIONS With increased ratios of lossy compression, a degradation of digital coronary angiograms occurs that results in decreased diagnostic accuracy. The sensitivity for detection of common diagnostic features was decreased, and subjective assessment of image quality was impaired. Caution is warranted in the interpretation of coronary angiograms that have been subjected to lossy JPEG compression beyond a ratio of 6:1.

[1]  L D Fisher,et al.  Reproducibility of coronary arteriographic reading in the coronary artery surgery study (CASS). , 1982, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[2]  Raimund Erbel,et al.  A framework for PACS development in cardiology , 1992, Proceedings Computers in Cardiology.

[3]  G. B. John Mancini,et al.  Cardiac angiography without cine film: erecting a "Tower of Babel" in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. American College of Cardiology Cardiac Catheterization Committee. , 1994, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  Joan L. Mitchell,et al.  JPEG: Still Image Data Compression Standard , 1992 .

[5]  G. B. John Mancini,et al.  Digital coronary angiography: advantages and limitations , 1991 .

[6]  R. Dinsmore,et al.  Interobserver Variability in Coronary Angiography , 1976, Circulation.

[7]  R. Vogel,et al.  Accuracy of individual and panel visual interpretations of coronary arteriograms: implications for clinical decisions. , 1990, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[8]  J. Murray,et al.  Variability in the Analysis of Coronary Arteriograms , 1977, Circulation.

[9]  T. Takaro,et al.  Observer Agreement in Evaluating Coronary Angiograms , 1975, Circulation.

[10]  J M Bramble,et al.  Image data compression. , 1988, Investigative radiology.

[11]  C. Mistretta,et al.  Cardiac digital angiography and dual-energy subtraction imaging: current and future trends , 1987 .

[12]  M. Bell,et al.  Cine film replacement: digital archival requirements and remaining obstacles. , 1998, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[13]  B. Harrawood,et al.  Compression of digital coronary angiograms does not affect visual or quantitative assessment of coronary artery stenosis severity. , 1996, The American journal of cardiology.

[14]  R. Harrington,et al.  Lossy (15:1) JPEG compression of digital coronary angiograms does not limit detection of subtle morphological features. , 1997, Circulation.