Effect of variability in the interpretation of coronary angiograms on the appropriateness of use of coronary revascularization procedures.

[1]  E. Topol,et al.  Our preoccupation with coronary luminology. The dissociation between clinical and angiographic findings in ischemic heart disease. , 1995, Circulation.

[2]  L. Leape,et al.  The appropriateness of use of coronary artery bypass graft surgery in New York State. , 1993, JAMA.

[3]  L. Leape,et al.  The appropriateness of use of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in New York State. , 1993, JAMA.

[4]  L. Leape,et al.  The appropriateness of use of coronary angiography in New York State. , 1993, JAMA.

[5]  K. Gould,et al.  Patterns in visual interpretation of coronary arteriograms as detected by quantitative coronary arteriography. , 1991, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[6]  H. Schaff,et al.  Ten-year follow-up of survival and myocardial infarction in the randomized Coronary Artery Surgery Study. , 1990, Circulation.

[7]  T. Bashore,et al.  A multiuser networked system for the large scale study of coronary artery restenosis using quantitative and qualitative coronary angiography , 1990, [1990] Proceedings Computers in Cardiology.

[8]  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.

[9]  M. Marcus,et al.  Understanding the Coronary Circulation Through Studies at the Microvascular Level , 1990, Circulation.

[10]  S. Kalbfleisch,et al.  Comparison of automated quantitative coronary angiography with caliper measurements of percent diameter stenosis. , 1990, The American journal of cardiology.

[11]  N. Kleiman,et al.  Comparison of quantitative coronary angiography to visual estimates of lesion severity pre and post PTCA. , 1990, American heart journal.

[12]  F. Loop,et al.  Guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures (Subcommittee on Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty). , 1988, Circulation.

[13]  K. Gould,et al.  Functional and Anatomic Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenoses , 1988 .

[14]  C. White,et al.  Does visual interpretation of the coronary arteriogram predict the physiologic importance of a coronary stenosis? , 1984, The New England journal of medicine.

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

[16]  E L Bolson,et al.  Arteriographic assessment of coronary atherosclerosis. Review of current methods, their limitations, and clinical applications. , 1982, Arteriosclerosis.

[17]  M. Murphy,et al.  Coronary angiogram interpretation. Interobserver variability. , 1978, JAMA.

[18]  S H Brooks,et al.  Reproducibility of a consensus panel in the interpretation of coronary angiograms. , 1978, American heart journal.

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

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

[21]  C. W. Hartman,et al.  Aortocoronary bypass surgery: Correlation of angiographic symptomatic and functional improvement at 1 year. , 1976, The American journal of cardiology.

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