141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3372175)
1. A comparison of 35 mm cine film and digital radiographic image recording: implications for quantitative coronary arteriography. Film vs. digital coronary quantification.
LeFree MT; Simon SB; Mancini GB; Bates ER; Vogel RA
Invest Radiol; 1988 Mar; 23(3):176-83. PubMed ID: 3372175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Quantitative coronary arteriography: design and validation.
Ratib OM; Mankovich NJ
Radiology; 1988 Jun; 167(3):743-7. PubMed ID: 3363133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Automated quantitative coronary arteriography: morphologic and physiologic validation in vivo of a rapid digital angiographic method.
Mancini GB; Simon SB; McGillem MJ; LeFree MT; Friedman HZ; Vogel RA
Circulation; 1987 Feb; 75(2):452-60. PubMed ID: 3802448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of coronary stenosis quantitation results from on-line digital and digitized cine film images.
Skelton TN; Kisslo KB; Bashore TM
Am J Cardiol; 1988 Sep; 62(7):381-6. PubMed ID: 3046284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of simultaneously performed digital and film-based angiography in assessment of coronary artery disease.
Gurley JC; Nissen SE; Booth DC; Harrison M; Grayburn P; Elion JL; DeMaria AN
Circulation; 1988 Dec; 78(6):1411-20. PubMed ID: 3191595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of digital and cine coronary arteriography.
Gurley JC; Nissen SE
Int J Card Imaging; 1990; 5(2-3):105-18. PubMed ID: 2230289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessment of coronary angioplasty by an automated digital angiographic method.
Katritsis D; Lythall DA; Anderson MH; Cooper IC; Webb-Peploe MW
Am Heart J; 1988 Nov; 116(5 Pt 1):1181-7. PubMed ID: 2973213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The influence of image enhancement and reconstruction on quantitative coronary arteriography.
van der Zwet PM; Reiber JH
Int J Card Imaging; 1995 Dec; 11(4):211-21. PubMed ID: 8596059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. In-vivo validation of videodensitometric coronary cross-sectional area measurement using dual-energy digital subtraction angiography.
Molloi S; Ersahin A; Hicks J; Wallis J
Int J Card Imaging; 1995 Dec; 11(4):223-31. PubMed ID: 8596060
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quantitative coronary arteriography on digital flat-panel system.
Van Herck PL; Gavit L; Gorissen P; Wuyts FL; Claeys MJ; Bosmans JM; Benali K; Vrints CJ
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2004 Oct; 63(2):192-200. PubMed ID: 15390252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effects of video frame averaging, smoothing and edge enhancement on the accuracy and precision of quantitative coronary arteriography.
Kavanaugh KM; Pinto IM; McGillem MJ; DeBoe SF; Mancini GB
Int J Card Imaging; 1990; 5(4):233-9. PubMed ID: 2230302
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Accuracy of electronic digital calipers compared with quantitative angiography in measuring coronary arterial diameter.
Uehata A; Matsuguchi T; Bittl JA; Orav J; Meredith IT; Anderson TJ; Selwyn AP; Ganz P; Yeung AC
Circulation; 1993 Oct; 88(4 Pt 1):1724-9. PubMed ID: 8403318
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Comparison of quantitative coronary arteriography using cinefilm and digital images].
Arai H; Sato H; Aizawa T; Watanabe H
J Cardiol; 2001 May; 37(5):241-8. PubMed ID: 11392892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Accuracy and precision of quantitative digital coronary arteriography: observer-, short-, and medium-term variabilities.
Reiber JH; van der Zwet PM; Koning G; von Land CD; van Meurs B; Gerbrands JJ; Buis B; van Voorthuisen AE
Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn; 1993 Mar; 28(3):187-98. PubMed ID: 8439993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of observer and videodensitometric measurements of simulated coronary artery stenoses.
Simons MA; Bastian BV; Bray BE; Dedrickson DR
Invest Radiol; 1987 Jul; 22(7):562-8. PubMed ID: 3305413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Validation of a new automatic system for biplane quantitative coronary arteriography.
Büchi M; Hess OM; Kirkeeide RL; Suter T; Muser M; Osenberg HP; Niederer P; Anliker M; Gould KL; Krayenbühl HP
Int J Card Imaging; 1990; 5(2-3):93-103. PubMed ID: 2230301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Edge detection versus densitometry in the quantitative assessment of stenosis phantoms: an in vivo comparison in porcine coronary arteries.
Di Mario C; Haase J; den Boer A; Reiber JH; Serruys PW
Am Heart J; 1992 Nov; 124(5):1181-9. PubMed ID: 1442484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Automated extraction, labelling and analysis of the coronary vasculature from arteriograms.
Dumay AC; Gerbrands JJ; Reiber JH
Int J Card Imaging; 1994 Sep; 10(3):205-15. PubMed ID: 7876660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Stenosis quantification in coronary CT angiography: impact of an integrated circuit detector with iterative reconstruction.
Morsbach F; Desbiolles L; Plass A; Leschka S; Schmidt B; Falk V; Alkadhi H; Stolzmann P
Invest Radiol; 2013 Jan; 48(1):32-40. PubMed ID: 23192163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessing coronary stenosis. Quantitative coronary angiography versus visual estimation from cine-film or pharmacological stress perfusion images.
Gottsauner-Wolf M; Sochor H; Moertl D; Gwechenberger M; Stockenhuber F; Probst P
Eur Heart J; 1996 Aug; 17(8):1167-74. PubMed ID: 8869857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
