This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Wouter Jukema, J. Articles by Bruschke, A. V. G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wouter Jukema, J. Articles by Bruschke, A. V. G. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Hazardous Substances DB CHOLESTEROL Medline Plus Health Information Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Coronary Artery Disease Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Influence of Angiographic Endpoints on the Outcome of Lipid Intervention Studies

A Proposal for Standardization

Department of Cardiology, University Hospital, Leiden

Ad J. van Boven

Department of Cardiology, University Hospital, Groningen

Aeilko H. Zwinderman

Department of Medical Statistics, Leiden University, Leiden

Egbert T. Bal

St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein

Johan H. C. Reiber

Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital, Leiden, The Netherlands

Albert V. G. Bruschke

Department of Cardiology, University Hospital, Leiden

The aims of this study were to evaluate the influence of different coronary angiographic endpoints on the outcome of lipid intervention studies and to formulate a proposal for angiographic endpoint standardization.

In recent angiographic intervention studies a confusing diversity in angiographic endpoints has been used to determine the outcome. In addition, differences in study populations (eg, bypass patients included or not) could influence results. This makes comparisons between studies cumbersome and raises the question to what extent the results of various studies may be subject to the selection of angiographic endpoints.

The investigators compared three frequently used endpoints (mean segment diameter, minimum obstruction diameter, and % stenosis) in a group of 505 patients who had just finished a trial designed to assess the effect of cholesterol lowering by pravastatin. To exclude a potential bias this analysis was carried out at the time that the study was still blinded. (continued on next page)

They found poor intercorrelation coefficients for mean segment diameter calculated in different ways, ranging from 0.55 to 0.95, dependent on inclusion or exclusion of segments influenced by coronary angioplasty or bypass grafting and on whether or not a value of 0 was assumed for occluded segments and segments distal to occlusions. The correlation between mean segment diameter and minimum obstruction diameter was 0.79; between minimum obstruction diameter and % stenosis, 0.85; and between mean segment diameter and % stenosis, only 0.64.

Different endpoints sometimes correlate poorly. This may lead to differences in results of angiographic intervention trials. The authors propose standardization by (1) using both mean segment diameter and minimum obstruction diameter as endpoints and (2) excluding from the primary analysis segments influenced by mechanical interven tions.

Angiology, Vol. 47, No. 7, 633-642 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/000331979604700701


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?