Why the study?
Does independent digital quantitative coronary angiography improve the accuracy of stenosis assessment and patient selection for PTCA compared to visual estimation?
Does independent digital quantitative coronary angiography improve the accuracy of stenosis assessment and patient selection for PTCA compared to visual estimation?
Independent digital quantitative coronary angiography avoids overestimation of stenosis severity seen with visual estimation, potentially reducing unnecessary PTCA procedures.
The diameter stenosis (%DS) in 226 coronary lesions of 200 patients undergoing primary (p) PTCA was assessed on-site by both visual "eye balling" (EB) and independent digital quantitative coronary angiography (DQCA). EB overestimated the %DS up to 49% and had a bimodal distribution with a nadir at 55%DS between the two peaks at /spl sim/50% and /spl sim/75%DS and a mean of 69.8/spl plusmn/19.9% whereas DQCA of the identical lesions revealed a near gaussian distribution with a mean of 58.5/spl plusmn/11.3%. EB revealed a %DS/spl ges/60% in 166 stenoses (73.4%), an estimate that led to pPTCA. However, only 119 (52.6%) of these lesions had objectively a %DS/spl ges/60% by DQCA. With regard to the indication for PTCA 47 of 166 performed pPTCA (28.3%) would not meet the indication criteria based on objective DQCA information. EB and DQCA (/spl plusmn/5%DS) led to a concordant indication for pPTCA only in 103 of 226 (60.8%) coronary lesions. The conclusion was reached that independent on-site DQCA supports decision-making and is likely to avoid the bias of "self-referral" and thus improve patient selection for pPTCA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stiel et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: