Abstract
This report describes the consistency of coronary angiogram evaluation by a four man panel of experts rendering “consensus opinion.” The panel evaluated films from 38 patients at two grading sessions separated by an interval of seven months. Fourteen patients' films were selected at random for duplicate evaluation. These contained 186 lesion sites. The panel was 95 per cent consistent in designating significant stenosis (≥ 70 per cent). “Consensus” panel reading appears more consistent than “group opinion” panel reading. The over-all standard deviation of the difference in panel reading was 14 per cent. The panel was most consistent in evaluating the right coronary artery, proximal LAD, and proximal circumflex. In the left main segment two of fourteen duplicate evaluations showed major discrepancy.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
