Sources of error in quantitative coronary angiography

David M. Herrington, Maria Siebes, Gary D. Walford

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

25 Scopus citations


Many studies have reported the accuracy of quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) based on experiments using moderated‐size phantoms imaged under unrealistic radiographic conditions. However, these observations may not be generalizable to the setting of clinical angiography. To determine QCA accuracy in a realistic radiographic setting and evaluate the impact of the x‐ray system line spread function, plexiglass phantoms were imaged inside and out of a human thorax. A realistic radiographic background was associated with a 38% increase in variability of results (p < 0.05). Low concentrations of contrast and large image intensifier input screens were associated with significantly larger errors and variability in results (p < 0.05). There was a systematic overestimation of diameter in the smallest phantom. A mathematical model of the x‐ray line spread function was developed that explains the observed overestimation of the smallest phantom and provide a rational approach for correction of the line spread function for QCA. Many factors encountered in clinical coronary angiography such as nonuniform radiographic background, low concentrations of contrast, and small vessel diameters have a significant adverse impact on the accuracy and/or variability of gradient‐based edge detection QCA systems. © 1993 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)314-321
Number of pages8
JournalCatheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis
Issue number4
StatePublished - Aug 1993


  • coronary phantoms
  • edge detection
  • quantitative coronary angiography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'Sources of error in quantitative coronary angiography'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this