Search

Background: Studies conducted decades ago described substantial disagreement and errors in physicians' angiographic interpretation of coronary stenosis severity. Despite the potential implications of such findings, no large-scale efforts to measure or improve clinical interpretation were subsequently undertaken., Methods and Results: We compared clinical interpretation of stenosis severity in coronary lesions with an independent assessment using quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) in 175 randomly selected patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention at 7 US hospitals in 2011. To assess agreement, we calculated mean difference in percent diameter stenosis between clinical interpretation and QCA and a Cohen weighted κ statistic. Of 216 treated lesions, median percent diameter stenosis was 80.0% (quartiles 1 and 3, 80.0% and 90.0%), with 213 (98.6%) assessed as ≥70%. Mean difference in percent diameter stenosis between clinical interpretation and QCA was 8.2±8.4%, reflecting an average higher percent diameter stenosis by clinical interpretation (P<0.001). A weighted κ of 0.27 (95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.36) was found between the 2 measurements. Of 213 lesions considered ≥70% by clinical interpretation, 56 (26.3%) were <70% by QCA, although none were <50%. Differences between the 2 measurements were largest for intermediate lesions by QCA (50% to <70%), with variation existing across sites., Conclusions: Physicians tended to assess coronary lesions treated with percutaneous coronary intervention as more severe than measurements by QCA. Almost all treated lesions were ≥70% by clinical interpretation, whereas approximately one quarter were <70% by QCA. These findings suggest opportunities to improve clinical interpretation of coronary angiography.

We report our identification of a single coronary ostium arising from the right coronary sinus of Valsalva, in a 63-year-old woman who presented with chest pain atypical of angina. Coronary angiograms showed that the left anterior descending coronary artery arose from a right ventricular branch and that the left circumflex coronary artery arose from a right posterolateral branch. Both arteries reconstituted themselves in a backward fashion from the apex to the base of the heart--a configuration that to our knowledge has not been reported. The patient was treated conservatively and reported no chest pain 24 months later. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]