Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 544

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Preliminary Report Comparing Magnetic Resonance Coronary Angiography with Conventional Angiography

Manning, Warren J., Li, Wei, Edelman, Robert R.·1993·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The ability to assess the patency of coronary arteries by noninvasive means would represent an important advance. We have developed a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) coronary angiographic technique that permits the display of areas of abnormal coronary blood flow. We have compared this method with conventional contrast angiography for the identification of coronary-artery stenoses. METHODS: MRI coronary angiography was performed with an electrocardiographically gated sequence in 39 subjects, 33 to 84 years of age, who were scheduled for elective cardiac catheterization with coronary angiography. Sequential overlapping transverse and oblique sections were acquired during periods of breath-holding and were displayed as cine loops for analysis. MRI and conventional angiographic data were compared in a blinded manner. The four major epicardial coronary arteries were classified by MRI coronary angiography as being normal (or having only minimal irregularities) or as having disease that was moderately severe to severe. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of MRI coronary angiography, as compared with conventional angiography, for correctly identifying individual vessels with > or = 50 percent angiographic stenoses were 90 percent and 92 percent, respectively. The corresponding positive and negative predictive values were 0.85 and 0.95, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the technique were 100 percent and 100 percent, respectively, for the left main coronary artery, 87 percent and 92 percent for the left anterior descending coronary artery, 71 percent and 90 percent for the left circumflex coronary artery, and 100 percent and 78 percent for the right coronary artery. CONCLUSIONS: MRI coronary angiography provides a new approach to evaluating the patency of coronary arteries. These preliminary data suggest that this technique may provide a noninvasive means of evaluating patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. At its current stage of development, this procedure may be most helpful for excluding clinically important stenoses in patients referred for diagnostic contrast angiography.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199303253281202

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 544

Metadata

Authors
Manning, W. J., Li, W., & Edelman, R. R.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1993-03-25
Volume
328
Issue
12
Pages
828-832
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2338675747
Cited by
544
References
12
FWCI
31.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Preliminary Report Comparing Magnetic Resonance Coronary Angiography with Conventional Angiography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199303253281202
The paper
Manning, W. J., Li, W., & Edelman, R. R. (1993). A Preliminary Report Comparing Magnetic Resonance Coronary Angiography with Conventional Angiography. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199303253281202

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.