BACKGROUND: The optimal duplex ultrasound (DUS) velocity criteria to determine in-stent carotid restenosis are controversial. We previously reported the optimal DUS velocities for >or=30% in-stent restenosis. This prospective study will further define the optimal velocities in detecting various severities of in-stent restenosis: >or=30%, >or=50%, and 80% to 99%. METHODS: The analysis included 144 patients who underwent carotid artery stenting as a part of clinical trials. All patients had completion arteriograms and underwent postoperative carotid DUS imaging, which was repeated at 1 month and every 6 months thereafter. Patients with peak systolic velocities (PSVs) of the internal carotid artery (ICA) of >or=130 cm/s underwent carotid computed tomography (CT)/angiogram. The PSVs and end-diastolic velocities of the ICA and common carotid artery (CCA) and the PSV of the ICA/CCA ratios were recorded. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis was used to determine the optimal velocity criteria for the diagnosis of >or=30, >or=50, and >or=80% restenosis. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 20 months (range, 1-78 months). Available for analysis were 215 pairs of imaging (DUS vs CTA/angiography) studies. The accuracy of CTA vs carotid arteriogram was confirmed in a subset of 22 patients (kappa = 0.81). The ROC analysis demonstrated that an ICA PSV of >or=154 cm/s was optimal for >or=30% stenosis with a sensitivity of 99%, specificity of 89%, positive-predictive value (PPV) of 96%, negative-predictive value (NPV) of 97%, and overall accuracy (OA) of 96%. An ICA EDV of 42 cm/s had sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and OA in detecting >or=30% stenosis of 86%, 62%, 87%, 60%, and 80%, respectively. An ICA PSV of >or=224 cm/s was optimal for >50% stenosis with a sensitivity of 99%, specificity of 90%, PPV of 99%, NPV of 90%, and OA of 98%. An ICA EDV of 88 cm/s had sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and OA in detecting >or=50% stenosis of 96%, 100%, 100%, 100%, 53%, and 96%. An ICA/CCA ratio of 3.439 had sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and OA in detecting >or=50% stenosis of 96%, 100%, 100%, 100%, 58%, and 96%, respectively. An ICA PSV of >or=325 cm/s was optimal for >80% stenosis with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 99%, PPV of 100%, NPV of 88%, and OA of 99%. An ICA EDV of 119 cm/sec had sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and OA in detecting >or=80% stenosis of 99%, 100%, 100%, 100%, 75%, and 99%, respectively. The PSV of the stented artery was a better predictor for in-stent restenosis than the end-diastolic velocity or ICA/CCA ratio. CONCLUSION: The optimal DUS velocity criteria for in-stent restenosis of >or=30%, >or=50%, and >or=80% were the PSVs of 154, 224, and 325 cm/s, respectively.
BACKGROUND: The optimal duplex ultrasound (DUS) velocity criteria to determine in-stent carotid restenosis are controversial. We previously reported the optimal DUS velocities for >or=30% in-stent restenosis. This prospective study will further define the optimal velocities in detecting various severities of in-stent restenosis: >or=30%, >or=50%, and 80% to 99%. METHODS: The analysis included 144 patients who underwent carotid artery stenting as a part of clinical trials. All patients had completion arteriograms and underwent postoperative carotid DUS imaging, which was repeated at 1 month and every 6 months thereafter. Patients with peak systolic velocities (PSVs) of the internal carotid artery (ICA) of >or=130 cm/s underwent carotid computed tomography (CT)/angiogram. The PSVs and end-diastolic velocities of the ICA and common carotid artery (CCA) and the PSV of the ICA/CCA ratios were recorded. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis was used to determine the optimal velocity criteria for the diagnosis of >or=30, >or=50, and >or=80% restenosis. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 20 months (range, 1-78 months). Available for analysis were 215 pairs of imaging (DUS vs CTA/angiography) studies. The accuracy of CTA vs carotid arteriogram was confirmed in a subset of 22 patients (kappa = 0.81). The ROC analysis demonstrated that an ICA PSV of >or=154 cm/s was optimal for >or=30% stenosis with a sensitivity of 99%, specificity of 89%, positive-predictive value (PPV) of 96%, negative-predictive value (NPV) of 97%, and overall accuracy (OA) of 96%. An ICA EDV of 42 cm/s had sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and OA in detecting >or=30% stenosis of 86%, 62%, 87%, 60%, and 80%, respectively. An ICA PSV of >or=224 cm/s was optimal for >50% stenosis with a sensitivity of 99%, specificity of 90%, PPV of 99%, NPV of 90%, and OA of 98%. An ICA EDV of 88 cm/s had sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and OA in detecting >or=50% stenosis of 96%, 100%, 100%, 100%, 53%, and 96%. An ICA/CCA ratio of 3.439 had sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and OA in detecting >or=50% stenosis of 96%, 100%, 100%, 100%, 58%, and 96%, respectively. An ICA PSV of >or=325 cm/s was optimal for >80% stenosis with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 99%, PPV of 100%, NPV of 88%, and OA of 99%. An ICA EDV of 119 cm/sec had sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and OA in detecting >or=80% stenosis of 99%, 100%, 100%, 100%, 75%, and 99%, respectively. The PSV of the stented artery was a better predictor for in-stent restenosis than the end-diastolic velocity or ICA/CCA ratio. CONCLUSION: The optimal DUS velocity criteria for in-stent restenosis of >or=30%, >or=50%, and >or=80% were the PSVs of 154, 224, and 325 cm/s, respectively.
Authors: R Eugene Zierler; Kirk W Beach; Robert O Bergelin; Brajesh K Lal; Wesley S Moore; Gary S Roubin; Jenifer H Voeks; Thomas G Brott Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2013-09-19 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Ali F AbuRahma; Zachary T AbuRahma; Grant Scott; Elliot Adams; Abe Mata; Matthew Beasley; L Scott Dean; Elaine Davis Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2018-12-11 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: J Kammler; H Blessberger; T Lambert; J Kellermair; M Grund; A Nahler; M Lichtenauer; S Schwarz; C Reiter; C Steinwender; A Kypta Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-02-08 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Brajesh K Lal; Kirk W Beach; Gary S Roubin; Helmi L Lutsep; Wesley S Moore; Mahmoud B Malas; David Chiu; Nicole R Gonzales; J Lee Burke; Michael Rinaldi; James R Elmore; Fred A Weaver; Craig R Narins; Malcolm Foster; Kim J Hodgson; Alexander D Shepard; James F Meschia; Robert O Bergelin; Jenifer H Voeks; George Howard; Thomas G Brott Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2012-08-02 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Floris Tm Bosch; Jeroen Hendrikse; Indran Davagnanam; Leo H Bonati; Aad van der Lugt; H B van der Worp; Gert J de Borst; Willem Mali; Martin M Brown; Paul J Nederkoorn Journal: Eur Stroke J Date: 2016-11-04