Key result
X-ray densitometry systematically overestimated electromagnetically measured coronary flow by about 20%, but successfully revealed typical pulsatile flow patterns in 34 patients.
Why the study?
Does x-ray densitometry accurately measure systolic and diastolic flow rates in the coronary artery system compared to electromagnetic flow measurements?
Population
Circulatory model and 34 patients with aortocoronary bypass grafts and coronary arteries
Comparison
Modified videodensitometric and… vs Electromagnetic flow measurements
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
Should not yet inform clinical coronary flow quantification; leaves open densitometry for pulsatile pattern research in grafts.
Observational (n=34)
Does x-ray densitometry accurately measure systolic and diastolic flow rates in the coronary artery system compared to electromagnetic flow measurements?
Effect estimate: Overestimated by about 20%
X-ray densitometry systematically overestimates coronary flow by about 20% compared to electromagnetic measurements, but provides typical pulsatile flow patterns and consistent flow velocities that may serve as an index for stenosis effects.
Spiller et al. (1983) conducted an observational in Coronary artery disease (patients with aortocoronary bypass grafts) (n=34). X-ray densitometry (videodensitometric and photodensitometric sampling) vs. Electromagnetic flow measurements was evaluated on Phasic flow rates in the coronary artery system (Overestimated by about 20%). X-ray densitometry systematically overestimated electromagnetically measured coronary flow by about 20%, but successfully revealed typical pulsatile flow patterns in 34 patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: