Ultrasound versus temporal artery biopsy in patients with Giant cell arteritis: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of giant cell arteritis by temporal artery biopsy is time-consuming and visual loss lies in the first week after its diagnosis. The purpose of the study was to test the hypothesis that ultrasound can reduce the risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment in giant cell arteritis. METHODS: Data regarding physical/ clinical features examinations, temporal artery biopsy examinations, ultrasound findings, and magnetic resonance imaging examinations of 980 suspected patients for giant cell arteritis were included in the study. Decision curve analysis was applied to get a beneficial score for selected diagnostic modalities. Cost analysis was performed for each patient. RESULTS: Fewer numbers of false positive giant cell arteritis results were reported under physical/ clinical features examinations following ultrasound detection than physical/clinical features examinations following temporal artery biopsy examinations (45 vs. 127, p < 0.0001). The working area that detects giant cell arteritis at least one time for physical/ clinical features examinations following ultrasound detection and physical/ clinical features examinations following temporal artery biopsy examinations were 0–91% and 0–86%. No significant difference for true negative results between magnetic resonance imaging and physical and clinical features examinations following ultrasound detection (p = 0.007). Physical and clinical features examinations following ultrasound detection were less expensive method than physical/ clinical features examinations following temporal artery biopsy examinations (14,023 ± 982 ¥/patient vs. 18,551 ± 1231 ¥/patient, p < 0.0001) and MRI. CONCLUSION: Physical and clinical features examinations following ultrasound are recommended for diagnosis of patients with suspected giant cell arteritis.