{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024344569288389514, 'fraction_numerical': 0.018726591760299626, 'mean_word_length': 4.841530054644808, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[The value of CT and MRT in assessing aortocoronary venous bypasses in comparison with coronary angiography].

In a follow-up study of 20 patients with a total of 52 aortocoronary venous bypass grafts (ACVB) three months after surgery, the patency of the grafts was assessed by magnetic resonance tomography (MR) followed by contrast enhanced CT-scan and selective coronary angiography on the following day. Each examination was interpreted independently and immediately after the procedure for the visibility and patency of the grafts. The statistical figures for the non-occluded grafts showed a sensitivity of 90.24% and a specificity of 54.54% for the CT scans and a sensitivity of 73.17% with a specificity of 72.72% for the MR. Although the sensitivity of the CT is somewhat higher than that of MR, neither procedure offers a clear advantage over each other and neither of both methods alone is adequate for the assessment of ACVB's. They are therefore only valuable as an adjunct to clinical data and as a screening procedure for selective coronary angiography.