FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 329:507-508 August 12, 1993 Number 7 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited Related Article by Steinberg, E. P. Related Article by Manning, W. J.

To the Editor: The study by Manning et al. on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) coronary angiography (March 25 issue¹) is an important first step toward identifying a noninvasive method of visualizing coronary anatomy. I am concerned, however, about the analysis performed in the study. Is it reasonable to exclude nine coronary segments from the analysis of the MRI studies because of technical limitations (uninterpretability and time constraints)? Should not MRI study of all 156 segments of coronary arteries intended for analysis have been compared with conventional methods according to "intention-to-analyze" principles? If all segments were uninterpretable, the sensitivity and . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References

HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org Comments and questions? Please contact us. The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.