Galbraith J E, Murphy M L, de Soyza N
JAMA. 1978 Nov 3;240(19):2053-6.
Clinicopathological correlation of premortem coronary angiograms and postmortem data was performed to determine the degree of interobserver variability in the clinical interpretation of coronary angiograms using the pathological findings as the standard of accuracy. Comparison of the independent interpretations of the antemortem coronary angiograms by three cardiologists showed no substantial difference in overall diagnostic accuracy among the three observers. In the majority of instances where a substantial angiographic lesion was found on coronary angiography, it was verified pathologically. In false-positive or false-negative interpretations, a majority opinion was accurate when compared with a pathological lesion in 50% of the instances. Despite the fact that coronary angiography is an excellent diagnostic tool, there remain limitations of the accuracy of interpretation not solved by a majority opinion.
对生前冠状动脉血管造影和死后数据进行临床病理相关性分析，以病理结果作为准确性标准，确定冠状动脉血管造影临床解读中观察者间的变异程度。三位心脏病专家对生前冠状动脉血管造影的独立解读比较显示，三位观察者在总体诊断准确性上没有实质性差异。在冠状动脉血管造影发现实质性血管病变的大多数情况下，经病理证实。在假阳性或假阴性解读中，与病理病变相比，50%的情况下多数意见是准确的。尽管冠状动脉血管造影是一种出色的诊断工具，但解读准确性仍存在多数意见无法解决的局限性。
