Cargando…

Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with common carotid ultrasound methods

PURPOSE: To assess the sensitivity and specificity of common carotid ultrasound method for carotid near-occlusion diagnosis. METHODS: Five hundred forty-eight patients examined with both ultrasound and CTA within 30 days of each other were analyzed. CTA graded by near-occlusion experts was used as r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Johansson, Elias, Vanoli, Davide, Bråten-Johansson, Isa, Law, Lucy, Aviv, Richard I, Fox, Allan J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8041670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33715027
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-021-02687-x
_version_ 1783677981453975552
author Johansson, Elias
Vanoli, Davide
Bråten-Johansson, Isa
Law, Lucy
Aviv, Richard I
Fox, Allan J
author_facet Johansson, Elias
Vanoli, Davide
Bråten-Johansson, Isa
Law, Lucy
Aviv, Richard I
Fox, Allan J
author_sort Johansson, Elias
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To assess the sensitivity and specificity of common carotid ultrasound method for carotid near-occlusion diagnosis. METHODS: Five hundred forty-eight patients examined with both ultrasound and CTA within 30 days of each other were analyzed. CTA graded by near-occlusion experts was used as reference standard. Low flow velocity, unusual findings, and commonly used flow velocity parameters were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred three near-occlusions, 272 conventional ≥50% stenosis, 162 <50% stenosis, and 11 occlusions were included. Carotid ultrasound was 22% (95%CI 14–30%; 23/103) sensitive and 99% (95%CI 99–100%; 442/445) specific for near-occlusion diagnosis. Near-occlusions overlooked on ultrasound were found misdiagnosed as occlusions (n = 13, 13%), conventional ≥50% stenosis (n = 65, 63%) and < 50% stenosis (n = 2, 2%). No velocity parameter or combination of parameters could identify the 65 near-occlusions mistaken for conventional ≥50% stenoses with >75% sensitivity and specificity. CONCLUSION: Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with commonly used carotid ultrasound methods. Improved carotid ultrasound methods are needed if ultrasound is to retain its position as sole preoperative modality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8041670
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80416702021-04-27 Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with common carotid ultrasound methods Johansson, Elias Vanoli, Davide Bråten-Johansson, Isa Law, Lucy Aviv, Richard I Fox, Allan J Neuroradiology Diagnostic Neuroradiology PURPOSE: To assess the sensitivity and specificity of common carotid ultrasound method for carotid near-occlusion diagnosis. METHODS: Five hundred forty-eight patients examined with both ultrasound and CTA within 30 days of each other were analyzed. CTA graded by near-occlusion experts was used as reference standard. Low flow velocity, unusual findings, and commonly used flow velocity parameters were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred three near-occlusions, 272 conventional ≥50% stenosis, 162 <50% stenosis, and 11 occlusions were included. Carotid ultrasound was 22% (95%CI 14–30%; 23/103) sensitive and 99% (95%CI 99–100%; 442/445) specific for near-occlusion diagnosis. Near-occlusions overlooked on ultrasound were found misdiagnosed as occlusions (n = 13, 13%), conventional ≥50% stenosis (n = 65, 63%) and < 50% stenosis (n = 2, 2%). No velocity parameter or combination of parameters could identify the 65 near-occlusions mistaken for conventional ≥50% stenoses with >75% sensitivity and specificity. CONCLUSION: Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with commonly used carotid ultrasound methods. Improved carotid ultrasound methods are needed if ultrasound is to retain its position as sole preoperative modality. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-03-13 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8041670/ /pubmed/33715027 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-021-02687-x Text en © The Author(s) 2021, corrected publication 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Diagnostic Neuroradiology
Johansson, Elias
Vanoli, Davide
Bråten-Johansson, Isa
Law, Lucy
Aviv, Richard I
Fox, Allan J
Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with common carotid ultrasound methods
title Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with common carotid ultrasound methods
title_full Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with common carotid ultrasound methods
title_fullStr Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with common carotid ultrasound methods
title_full_unstemmed Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with common carotid ultrasound methods
title_short Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with common carotid ultrasound methods
title_sort near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with common carotid ultrasound methods
topic Diagnostic Neuroradiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8041670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33715027
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-021-02687-x
work_keys_str_mv AT johanssonelias nearocclusionisdifficulttodiagnosewithcommoncarotidultrasoundmethods
AT vanolidavide nearocclusionisdifficulttodiagnosewithcommoncarotidultrasoundmethods
AT bratenjohanssonisa nearocclusionisdifficulttodiagnosewithcommoncarotidultrasoundmethods
AT lawlucy nearocclusionisdifficulttodiagnosewithcommoncarotidultrasoundmethods
AT avivrichardi nearocclusionisdifficulttodiagnosewithcommoncarotidultrasoundmethods
AT foxallanj nearocclusionisdifficulttodiagnosewithcommoncarotidultrasoundmethods