Why the study?
How do subjective and computer-assisted methods compare in their accuracy to detect significant coronary artery disease using angiographic left ventricular regional wall motion?
How do subjective and computer-assisted methods compare in their accuracy to detect significant coronary artery disease using angiographic left ventricular regional wall motion?
Subjective assessment of angiographic left ventricular regional wall motion provides high predictive accuracy, while among computer-assisted methods, the area method is most specific and centerline/radial methods are most sensitive for detecting mild hypokinesis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Subjective assessment may aid CAD detection in practice; leaves open optimal computer-assisted method pending prospective validation.
Kussmaul et al. (1990) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: