Go to JCI Insight
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Neuroscience
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • Vascular biology
    • All ...
  • Videos
    • ASCI Milestone Awards
    • Video Abstracts
    • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • Reviews
    • View all reviews ...
    • The cGAS-STING pathway: DNA sensing in health and disease (Jun 2026)
    • Neurodegeneration (Mar 2026)
    • Clinical innovation and scientific progress in GLP-1 medicine (Nov 2025)
    • Pancreatic Cancer (Jul 2025)
    • Complement Biology and Therapeutics (May 2025)
    • Evolving insights into MASLD and MASH pathogenesis and treatment (Apr 2025)
    • Microbiome in Health and Disease (Feb 2025)
    • View all review series ...
  • Viewpoint
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Editorials
    • Commentaries
    • Editor's notes
    • Reviews
    • Viewpoints
    • 100th anniversary
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • Reviews
  • Review series
  • ASCI Milestone Awards
  • Video Abstracts
  • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • In-Press Preview
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Editorials
  • Commentaries
  • Editor's notes
  • Reviews
  • Viewpoints
  • 100th anniversary
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact

Usage Information

Precision and reproducibility of quantitative coronary angiography with applications to controlled clinical trials. A sampling study.
R H Selzer, C Hagerty, S P Azen, M Siebes, P Lee, A Shircore, D H Blankenhorn
R H Selzer, C Hagerty, S P Azen, M Siebes, P Lee, A Shircore, D H Blankenhorn
View: Text | PDF
Research Article

Precision and reproducibility of quantitative coronary angiography with applications to controlled clinical trials. A sampling study.

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

Most computer methods that quantify coronary artery disease from angiograms are designed to analyze frames recorded during the end-diastolic portion of the cardiac cycle. The purpose of this study was to determine if end diastole is the best portion of the cardiac cycle to sample, or if other sampling schemes produce more precise and/or reproducible estimates of coronary disease. 20 cinecoronary angiograms were selected at random from a controlled clinical trial testing the effects of plasma lipid lowering on atherosclerosis. Sampling schemes included sequential and random sampling of two to five frames within the complete cardiac cycle, systole, and diastole. Three vessel measures and percent stenosis were evaluated for each sampling scheme. From the sampling experiment, it was determined that sampling sequentially end diastole yielded the most precise estimates (i.e., exhibiting minimum variability within a cycle) of the vessel measures. With regard to reproducibility (i.e., similar values across cycles), sampling randomly within the cycle was best. Overall, the average diameter of a vessel segment was the most precise and the most reproducible of the measures. Sample size calculations are given for each of these measures under the best sampling scheme.

Authors

R H Selzer, C Hagerty, S P Azen, M Siebes, P Lee, A Shircore, D H Blankenhorn

×

Usage data is cumulative from July 2025 through July 2026.

Usage JCI PMC
Text version 248 11
PDF 128 11
Scanned page 506 6
Citation downloads 148 0
Totals 1,030 28
Total Views 1,058
(Click and drag on plot area to zoom in. Click legend items above to toggle)

Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.

Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.

Advertisement

Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN: 0021-9738 (print), 1558-8238 (online)

Sign up for email alerts