Literature DB >> 31008301

Optimal cut-off criteria for duplex ultrasound compared with computed tomography angiography for the diagnosis of restenosis in stented carotid arteries in the international carotid stenting study.

Floris Tm Bosch1, Jeroen Hendrikse2, Indran Davagnanam3, Leo H Bonati4, Aad van der Lugt5, H B van der Worp2, Gert J de Borst2, Willem Mali2, Martin M Brown3, Paul J Nederkoorn1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies that reported duplex-ultrasound cut-off criteria, based on blood velocity parameters, for the degree of stenosis in a stented carotid artery were either retrospective, or the reference test was carried out only when a patient was suspected of having restenosis at duplex ultrasound, which is likely to have resulted in verification bias. We performed a prospective study of diagnostic accuracy to find new blood velocity cut-offs in duplex ultrasound for in-stent restenosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Stented patients within the international carotid stenting study were eligible. Patients had a carotid computed tomography angiography in addition to routine duplex ultrasound performed at a yearly follow-up. Duplex-ultrasound bloodflow velocity parameters were compared to the degree of stenosis on computed tomography angiography. The results were analysed using receiver-operating-characteristic curves.
RESULTS: We included 103 patients in this study. On computed tomography angiography, 30 (29.1%) patients had a 30%-49% in-stent restenosis, 21 (20.4%) patients had 50%-69% in-stent restenosis and 5 (4.9%) patients a ≥70% in-stent restenosis. The cut-off value ≥50% stenosis was a peak systolic velocity of 125 cm/s (sensitivity: 63% (95% CI: 41-79), specificity: 83% (95% CI: 72-90)). DISCUSSION: This study provides a level 2b evidence for new cut-off values for in-stent restenosis. Unfortunately, we could not say anything about severe stenosis because of the low number of severe stenosis after one year.
CONCLUSIONS: The 125 cm/s cut-off value on duplex ultrasound is lower than found in previous studies and equal to unstented arteries. Duplex-ultrasound measurements made in stented carotid arteries should not be corrected for the presence of a stent when determining the degree of stenosis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Stroke; computed tomography angiography; duplex ultrasound; restenosis; stenting

Year:  2016        PMID: 31008301      PMCID: PMC6453175          DOI: 10.1177/2396987316678361

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Stroke J        ISSN: 2396-9873


  23 in total

Review 1.  Update on the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stent Trial (CREST) protocol.

Authors:  Robert W Hobson
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 6.113

Review 2.  Duplex ultrasound and magnetic resonance angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography in carotid artery stenosis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Paul J Nederkoorn; Yolanda van der Graaf; M G Myriam Hunink
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2003-04-10       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 3.  Systematic review of computed tomographic angiography for assessment of carotid artery disease.

Authors:  Mark J W Koelemay; Paul J Nederkoorn; Johannes B Reitsma; Charles B Majoie
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2004-09-02       Impact factor: 7.914

4.  Determining in-stent stenosis of carotid arteries by duplex ultrasound criteria.

Authors:  Stephen F Stanziale; Mark H Wholey; Tamer N Boules; Faith Selzer; Michel S Makaroun
Journal:  J Endovasc Ther       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.487

Review 5.  Non-invasive imaging compared with intra-arterial angiography in the diagnosis of symptomatic carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  J M Wardlaw; F M Chappell; J J K Best; K Wartolowska; E Berry
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2006-05-06       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 6.  Multi-detector row CT angiography in the assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Zhonghua Sun; Robert Davidson; Cheng Hsun Lin
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2007-12-26       Impact factor: 3.528

7.  Ultrasound velocity criteria for carotid in-stent restenosis.

Authors:  Yung-Wei Chi; Christopher J White; T Cooper Woods; Corey K Goldman
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2007-02-15       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  International carotid stenting study: protocol for a randomised clinical trial comparing carotid stenting with endarterectomy in symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.

Authors:  Roland L Featherstone; Martin M Brown; Lucy J Coward
Journal:  Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2004-06-01       Impact factor: 2.762

9.  Carotid artery stenting: is there a need to revise ultrasound velocity criteria?

Authors:  Brajesh K Lal; Robert W Hobson; Jonathan Goldstein; Elie Y Chakhtoura; Walter N Durán
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.268

10.  CT angiography of stented carotid arteries: comparison with Doppler ultrasonography.

Authors:  Bae Ju Kwon; Cheolkyu Jung; Seung Hun Sheen; Jae Hoon Cho; Moon Hee Han
Journal:  J Endovasc Ther       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 3.487

View more
  3 in total

1.  In vitro performance of echoPIV for assessment of laminar flow profiles in a carotid artery stent.

Authors:  Astrid M Hoving; Jason Voorneveld; Julia Mikhal; Johan G Bosch; Erik Groot Jebbink; Cornelis H Slump
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-01-13

2.  Defining Duplex Ultrasound Criteria for In-Stent Restenosis of the Carotid Artery Using Computed Tomographic Angiography.

Authors:  Lucas J Bitsko; Evan J Ryer; Ellen P Penn; Gregory G Salzler; Matthew Major; Jeremy Irvan; James R Elmore
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-07-09

Review 3.  The management of carotid restenosis: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Francesco Stilo; Nunzio Montelione; Rosalinda Calandrelli; Marisa Distefano; Francesco Spinelli; Vincenzo Di Lazzaro; Fabio Pilato
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-10
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.