Detrano R, Simpfendorfer C, McIntyre R, Salcedo E E
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1985;8(2):55-8. doi: 10.1007/BF02552859.
Peripheral and central intravenous injections of contrast material were performed during the cardiac digital subtraction angiographic (DSA) studies of 24 patients keeping constant X-ray exposure factors, volume of dye, and angiographic projection. The resulting continuous-mask-subtracted runs of cardiac images were videotaped and reviewed by three observers. In a forced-choice comparison, the central injection was judged to produce images of superior technical quality 42 times as opposed to 30 times for the peripheral injection. When comparing the diagnostic quality of the studies, the reviewers found no significant difference in diagnostic adequacy in 65 judgments (90%). They found the central injection to be superior in diagnostic quality in four judgments (twice in the same patient) and the peripheral injection superior in three judgments (all in the same patient). Although central intravenous injections produce slightly better cardiac digital subtraction angiographic images, we have found peripheral injections diagnostically adequate for most of these studies and favor them for simplicity and ease of performance.
在对24例患者进行心脏数字减影血管造影（DSA）研究期间，进行了外周静脉和中心静脉注射造影剂，同时保持X射线曝光因素、染料体积和血管造影投影不变。将所得的连续蒙片相减的心脏图像序列进行录像，并由三名观察者进行评估。在强制选择比较中，中心静脉注射被判定产生技术质量 superior的图像42次，而外周静脉注射为30次。在比较研究的诊断质量时， reviewers发现在65次判断（90%）中诊断充分性无显著差异。他们发现在4次判断中中心静脉注射的诊断质量 superior（同一患者有两次），在3次判断中外周静脉注射的诊断质量 superior（均在同一患者）。尽管中心静脉注射能产生稍好的心脏数字减影血管造影图像，但我们发现外周静脉注射对大多数此类研究在诊断上是充分的，并且因其操作简单易行而更倾向于使用外周静脉注射。 （注：superior在原文语境中应结合医学专业含义准确理解，这里直译为“ superior”保留英文，以便根据医学知识准确把握其意思，可能是“更好、更优”等意思 ）
