American College of Cardiology/ European Society of Cardiology international study of angiographic data compression phase III. Measurement Of image quality differences at varying levels of data compression.

[1]  Johan H. C. Reiber,et al.  Progress in quantitative coronary arteriography , 2012, Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine.

[2]  S E Nissen,et al.  American College of Cardiology/ European Society of Cardiology international study of angiographic data compression phase I. The effects of lossy data compression on recognition of diagnostic features in digital coronary angiography. , 2000, European heart journal.

[3]  Johan H. C. Reiber,et al.  American College of Cardiology/ European Society of Cardiology international study of angiographic data compression phase II: The effects of varying JPEG data compression levels on the quantitative assessment of the degree of stenosis in digital coronary angiography , 2000 .

[4]  U Bürgel,et al.  American College of Cardiology/European Society of Cardiology International Study of Angiographic Data Compression Phase III: measurement of image quality differences at varying levels of data compression. , 2000, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  S E Nissen,et al.  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. , 2000, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

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

[7]  P. Robinson,et al.  Radiology's Achilles' heel: error and variation in the interpretation of the Röntgen image. , 1997, The British journal of radiology.

[8]  S. Silber,et al.  Impact of various compression rates on interpretation of digital coronary angiograms. , 1997, International journal of cardiology.

[9]  Cornelis H. Slump,et al.  Assessment of image compression quality by means of quantitative coronary angiography , 1997, Medical Imaging.

[10]  R. David.  Cine Film Replacement , 1996 .

[11]  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.

[12]  Kenneth G. Morris,et al.  Lossy (15:1) JPEG Compression of Digital Coronary Angiograms Does Not Limit Detection of Subtle Morphological Features , 1996 .

[13]  J. Reiber,et al.  Effect of data compression on quantitative coronary measurements. , 1995, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[14]  R Brennecke,et al.  Report of the ESC Task Force on Digital Imaging in Cardiology. Recommendations for digital imaging in angiocardiography. , 1994, European heart journal.

[15]  G. Mancini,et al.  Quantitative coronary angiography , 1994 .

[16]  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.

[17]  M. Goldberg,et al.  Application of wavelet compression to digitized radiographs. , 1994, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[18]  Marcel Breeuwer,et al.  Overlapped transform coding of medical x-ray images , 1994, Medical Imaging.

[19]  J. J. Gerbrands,et al.  Accuracy and precision of quantitative digital coronary arteriography: observer-, short-, and medium-term variabilities. , 1993, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

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

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

[22]  Gregory K. Wallace,et al.  The JPEG still picture compression standard , 1991, CACM.

[23]  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.

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

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

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

[27]  R. Califf,et al.  Gender and acute myocardial infarction: is there a different response to thrombolysis? , 1997, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

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

[29]  Johan H. C. Reiber,et al.  Why and how should QCA systems be validated , 1994 .

[30]  Johan H. C. Reiber,et al.  Comparison of accuracy and precision of quantitative coronary arterial analysis between cinefilm and digital systems , 1994 .

[31]  Gregory K. Wallace,et al.  The JPEG Still Image Compression Standard , 1991 .

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

[33]  V. Hombach,et al.  Digital coronary angiography , 1991 .

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

[35]  J. H. C. Reiber,et al.  State of the Art in Quantitative Coronary Arteriography , 1986, Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine.

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