Comparison of Fluoro and Cine Coronary Angiography

Balancing Acceptable Outcomes With a Reduction in Radiation Dose

Ayhan Olcay, MD; Ekrem Guler, MD; Ibrahim Oguz Karaca, MD; Mehmet Onur Omaygenc, MD; Filiz Kizilirmak, MD; Erkam Olgun, MD; Esra Yenipinar, RN; Huseyin Altug Cakmak, MD; Dursun Duman, MD


J Invasive Cardiol. 2015;27(4):199-202. 

In This Article


There was no difference between age, sex distribution, presence of diabetes mellitus, creatinine level, acute coronary syndrome presentation, or history of PCI or CABG between LFH and cine stenting groups. Patients with normal coronary arteries represented 34.8% of the LFH group and 23.17% of the cine group, and the difference was not statistically different (Table 1).

Mean cumulative air kerma was higher in the cine group vs the LFH group (660.46 ± 638.6 mGy vs 141.2 ± 114.6 mGy; P<.001). Mean cumulative DAP was higher in the cine group vs the LFH group (50058.98 ± 53542.71 mGy•cm2 vs 11349.2 ± 8796.46 mGy•cm2; P<.001). Mean fluoroscopy times were higher in the cine group vs the LFH group (3.87 ± 5.08 minutes vs 1.66 ± 1.51 minutes; P<.01). Mean contrast use was higher in the cine group vs the LFH group (112.07 ± 43.79 cc vs 88.15 ± 23.84 cc; P<.001). Body mass indices were not different between cine and LFH groups (30.26 ± 4.8 kg/m2 vs 28.7 ± 4.3 kg/m2; P=.07) (Table 2).

There was no morbidity, mortality, or contrast-induced nephropathy in any of the patients. Cardiologists assessed LFH images sufficient for decision making and additional cine images were taken for better images in only 1 LFH case.

Mean value of intraclass correlation was not statistically different between percent stenosis visual estimates of the three operators between cine and LFH angiography groups (0.69387 ± 0.18711 vs 0.62327 ± 0.30585; P=.45) (Table 3). Average Cronbach's alpha was 0.69 and 0.62, which is in the acceptable range for visual assessment:

Cronbach's alpha  Internal consistency

α ≥ 0.9   Excellent (high-stakes testing)

0.7 ≤ α < 0.9 Good (low-stakes testing)

0.6 ≤ α < 0.7 Acceptable

0.5 ≤ α < 0.6 Poor

α < 0.5  Unacceptable