These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30395141)

  • 1. Comparison of quantitative and qualitative coronary angiography: computer versus the eye.
    Sen T; Kilit C; Astarcioglu MA; Asarcikli LD; Aksu T; Kafes H; Parspur A; Gozubuyuk G; Amasyali B
    Cardiovasc J Afr; 2018; 29(5):278-282. PubMed ID: 30395141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Visual estimation versus different quantitative coronary angiography methods to assess lesion severity in bifurcation lesions.
    Grundeken MJ; Collet C; Ishibashi Y; Généreux P; Muramatsu T; LaSalle L; Kaplan AV; Wykrzykowska JJ; Morel MA; Tijssen JG; de Winter RJ; Onuma Y; Leon MB; Serruys PW
    Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2018 Jun; 91(7):1263-1270. PubMed ID: 28836339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Usefulness of the Finet law to guide stent size selection in ostial left main stenting: Comparison with standard angiographic estimation.
    Rigatelli G; Zuin M; Ronco F; Caprioglio F; Cavazzini D; Giatti S; Braggion G; Perilli S; Nguyen VT
    Cardiovasc Revasc Med; 2018 Oct; 19(7 Pt A):751-754. PubMed ID: 29706477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Automated quantification of stenosis severity on 64-slice CT: a comparison with quantitative coronary angiography.
    Boogers MJ; Schuijf JD; Kitslaar PH; van Werkhoven JM; de Graaf FR; Boersma E; van Velzen JE; Dijkstra J; Adame IM; Kroft LJ; de Roos A; Schreur JH; Heijenbrok MW; Jukema JW; Reiber JH; Bax JJ
    JACC Cardiovasc Imaging; 2010 Jul; 3(7):699-709. PubMed ID: 20633847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison between two-dimensional and three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography for the prediction of functional severity in true bifurcation lesions: Insights from the randomized DK-CRUSH II, III, and IV trials.
    Zhang YJ; Zhu H; Shi SY; Muramatsu T; Pan DR; Ye F; Zhang JJ; Tian NL; Bourantas CV; Chen SL
    Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2016 Mar; 87 Suppl 1():589-98. PubMed ID: 26876688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Diagnostic performance of quantitative coronary computed tomography angiography and quantitative coronary angiography to predict hemodynamic significance of intermediate-grade stenoses.
    Ghekiere O; Dewilde W; Bellekens M; Hoa D; Couvreur T; Djekic J; Coolen T; Mancini I; Vanhoenacker PK; Dendale P; Nchimi A
    Int J Cardiovasc Imaging; 2015 Dec; 31(8):1651-61. PubMed ID: 26323355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Impact of two formulas to calculate percentage diameter stenosis of coronary lesions: from stenosis models (phantom lesion model) to actual clinical lesions.
    Hideo-Kajita A; Wopperer S; Beyene SS; Meirovich YF; Melaku GD; Kuku KO; Brathwaite EJ; Ozaki Y; Dan K; Torguson R; Waksman R; Garcia-Garcia HM
    Int J Cardiovasc Imaging; 2019 Dec; 35(12):2139-2146. PubMed ID: 31352559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Discrepancy in the assessment of jailed side branch lesions by visual estimation and quantitative coronary angiographic analysis: comparison with fractional flow reserve.
    Shin DH; Koo BK; Waseda K; Park KW; Kim HS; Corral M; Lansky A; Honda Y; Fearon WF; Fitzgerald PJ
    Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2011 Nov; 78(5):720-6. PubMed ID: 22025472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison between different kernel reformatting filters in 3D quantitative analysis of MDCT coronary angiography.
    Malagò R; Pezzato A; Barbiani C; Mantovani W; Caliari G; Alfonsi U; Tavella D; Mucelli RP
    Radiol Med; 2011 Dec; 116(8):1203-16. PubMed ID: 21892715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Quantitative computed tomographic coronary angiography: does it predict functionally significant coronary stenoses?
    Rossi A; Papadopoulou SL; Pugliese F; Russo B; Dharampal AS; Dedic A; Kitslaar PH; Broersen A; Meijboom WB; van Geuns RJ; Wragg A; Ligthart J; Schultz C; Petersen SE; Nieman K; Krestin GP; de Feyter PJ
    Circ Cardiovasc Imaging; 2014 Jan; 7(1):43-51. PubMed ID: 24280729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Diagnostic accuracy in coronary stenosis: comparison between visual score and quantitative analysis (quantitative computed tomographic angiography) in coronary angiography by multidetector computed tomography-coronary angiography and quantitative analysis (quantitative coronary angiography) in conventional coronary angiography.
    Malagò R; D'Onofrio M; Tavella D; Mantovani W; Brunelli S; Pezzato A; Caliari G; Nicolì L; Benussi P; Mucelli RP
    J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2010; 34(5):652-9. PubMed ID: 20861765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Computer-aided CT coronary artery stenosis detection: comparison with human reading and quantitative coronary angiography.
    Rief M; Kranz A; Hartmann L; Roehle R; Laule M; Dewey M
    Int J Cardiovasc Imaging; 2014 Dec; 30(8):1621-7. PubMed ID: 25117643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of the ratio of coronary arterial lumen volume to left ventricle myocardial mass derived from coronary CT angiography on fractional flow reserve.
    Taylor CA; Gaur S; Leipsic J; Achenbach S; Berman DS; Jensen JM; Dey D; Bøtker HE; Kim HJ; Khem S; Wilk A; Zarins CK; Bezerra H; Lesser J; Ko B; Narula J; Ahmadi A; Øvrehus KA; St Goar F; De Bruyne B; Nørgaard BL
    J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr; 2017 Nov; 11(6):429-436. PubMed ID: 28789941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Relative atherosclerotic plaque volume by CT coronary angiography trumps conventional stenosis assessment for identifying flow-limiting lesions.
    Kato N; Kishi S; Arbab-Zadeh A; Rybicki FJ; Tanimoto S; Aoki J; Watanabe M; Horiuchi Y; Furui K; Hara K; Ibukuro K; Lima JAC; Tanabe K
    Int J Cardiovasc Imaging; 2017 Nov; 33(11):1847-1855. PubMed ID: 28597124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The impact of image resolution on computation of fractional flow reserve: coronary computed tomography angiography versus 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography.
    Liu L; Yang W; Nagahara Y; Li Y; Lamooki SR; Muramatsu T; Kitslaar P; Sarai M; Ozaki Y; Barlis P; Yan F; Reiber JH; Tu S
    Int J Cardiovasc Imaging; 2016 Mar; 32(3):513-23. PubMed ID: 26507326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of Physician Visual Assessment With Quantitative Coronary Angiography in Assessment of Stenosis Severity in China.
    Zhang H; Mu L; Hu S; Nallamothu BK; Lansky AJ; Xu B; Bouras G; Cohen DJ; Spertus JA; Masoudi FA; Curtis JP; Gao R; Ge J; Yang Y; Li J; Li X; Zheng X; Li Y; Krumholz HM; Jiang L;
    JAMA Intern Med; 2018 Feb; 178(2):239-247. PubMed ID: 29340571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The impact of acquisition angle differences on three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography.
    Tu S; Holm NR; Koning G; Maeng M; Reiber JH
    Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2011 Aug; 78(2):214-22. PubMed ID: 21766427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of clinical interpretation with visual assessment and quantitative coronary angiography in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in contemporary practice: the Assessing Angiography (A2) project.
    Nallamothu BK; Spertus JA; Lansky AJ; Cohen DJ; Jones PG; Kureshi F; Dehmer GJ; Drozda JP; Walsh MN; Brush JE; Koenig GC; Waites TF; Gantt DS; Kichura G; Chazal RA; O'Brien PK; Valentine CM; Rumsfeld JS; Reiber JH; Elmore JG; Krumholz RA; Weaver WD; Krumholz HM
    Circulation; 2013 Apr; 127(17):1793-800. PubMed ID: 23470859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Fully automated quantitative coronary angiography versus optical coherence tomography guidance for coronary stent implantation (FLASH): Study protocol for a randomized controlled noninferiority trial.
    Kim Y; Park H; Yoon HJ; Suh J; Kang SH; Lim YH; Jang DH; Park JH; Shin ES; Bae JW; Lee JH; Oh JH; Kang DY; Kweon J; Jo MW; Park DW; Kim YH; Ahn JM;
    Am Heart J; 2024 Sep; 275():86-95. PubMed ID: 38723880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. An angiographic tool based on Visual estimation for Risk prEdiction of Side branch OccLusion in coronary bifurcation interVEntion: the V-RESOLVE score system.
    Dou K; Zhang D; Xu B; Yang Y; Yin D; Qiao S; Wu Y; You S; Wang Y; Yan R; Gao R; Kirtane AJ
    EuroIntervention; 2016 Apr; 11(14):e1604-11. PubMed ID: 27056121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.