Literature DB >> 8898797

An approach for the use of Doppler ultrasound as a screening tool for hemodynamically significant stenosis (despite heterogeneity of Doppler performance). A multicenter experience. Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study Investigators.

G Howard1, W H Baker, L E Chambless, V J Howard, A M Jones, J F Toole.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: The Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study (ACAS) Doppler validation study assessed the performance of individual Doppler machines across a spectrum of laboratories. We attempted to establish a threshold specific to individual machines to predict angiographically defined hemodynamic stenosis. The reliability of these Doppler ultrasound criteria was prospectively and independently evaluated among patients screened with ultrasound in the ACAS trial.
METHODS: Regression techniques were used to establish the relationship between Doppler velocity and percent stenosis by angiography for 63 specific Doppler machines. This relationship was used to establish a Doppler threshold to provide a 90% positive predictive value (PPV) of a 60% stenosis by angiography. The sensitivity of each Doppler machine to detect a 60% stenosis (at the 90% PPV threshold) was estimated. The efficacy of these Doppler thresholds was then prospectively evaluated by calculating the PPV among ACAS participants eligible by ultrasound.
RESULTS: Of the 63 machines, 13 (21%) had an excellent sensitivity (80%+) at 90% PPV. In 32 devices (51%) only a marginal sensitivity (50% to 80%) could be achieved. In 9 devices (14%) the sensitivity was poor (0% to 50%), and in 9 (14%) no threshold could be established. Despite the heterogeneity of Doppler performance, the standardization program worked as designed in the ACAS trial. Of 825 surgical patients, 399 were eligible by Doppler and 395 subsequently underwent angiography. Of these, 32 (8.1%; 95% confidence interval, 5.4% to 10.8%) did not have hemodynamically significant stenosis by arteriography, a proportion nonsignificantly lower than the planned 10% by the PPV.
CONCLUSIONS: The performance of Doppler ultrasound was highly variable. This suggests that Doppler performance is likely overstated in the literature, but specific devices may perform satisfactorily to detect individuals with hemodynamically significant stenosis. Because performance differs substantially among devices, local investigators are strongly urged to maintain local standardization series. With such standardization, ultrasound performance is sufficient for admission to clinical trials and as the is sufficient for admission to clinical trials and as the basis for carotid surgery. However, without quality control many ultrasound machines are not adequate to accurately predict the degree of carotid stenosis and should not be the only test to decide whether surgery is warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8898797     DOI: 10.1161/01.str.27.11.1951

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stroke        ISSN: 0039-2499            Impact factor:   7.914


  9 in total

Review 1.  Utility of noninvasive studies in the evaluation of patients with carotid artery disease.

Authors:  Dean C C Johnston; Larry B Goldstein
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 5.081

2.  Reappraisal of flow velocity ratio in common carotid artery to predict hemodynamic change in carotid stenosis.

Authors:  Masahiro Kamouchi; Kazuhiro Kishikawa; Yasushi Okada; Tooru Inoue; Setsuro Ibayashi; Mitsuo Iida
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.825

3.  Multi-detector row CT angiography in the assessment of carotid artery disease in symptomatic patients: comparison with rotational angiography and digital subtraction angiography.

Authors:  Marja Berg; Zishu Zhang; Aki Ikonen; Petri Sipola; Reetta Kälviäinen; Hannu Manninen; Ritva Vanninen
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Carotid artery ultrasonographic assessment in patients from the Fremantle Diabetes Study Phase II with carotid bruits detected by electronic auscultation.

Authors:  Arthur Knapp; Violetta Cetrullo; Brett A Sillars; Nat Lenzo; Wendy A Davis; Timothy M E Davis
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 6.118

5.  Transesophageal echocardiography screening in subjects with a first cerebrovascular ischemic event.

Authors:  Kate C Young; Curtis G Benesch
Journal:  J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2010-09-02       Impact factor: 2.136

Review 6.  Management of extracranial carotid artery disease.

Authors:  Yinn Cher Ooi; Nestor R Gonzalez
Journal:  Cardiol Clin       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 2.213

7.  The clinical implications of adopting new criteria for the grading of internal carotid artery stenosis.

Authors:  Nicole Curtis; Martin Necas; Matthew Versteeg
Journal:  Australas J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2018-02-14

8.  Validation of Risk Prediction Models to Detect Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

Authors:  Michiel H F Poorthuis; Alison Halliday; M Sofia Massa; Paul Sherliker; Rachel Clack; Dylan R Morris; Robert Clarke; Gert J de Borst; Richard Bulbulia; Sarah Lewington
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 5.501

9.  The Association between Ideal Cardiovascular Health Metrics and Extracranial Carotid Artery Stenosis in a Northern Chinese Population: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Zhiru Hao; Yong Zhang; Yongming Li; Jinbo Zhao; Yong Zhou; Jing Qiu; Ruiping Zhao; Jiang Hu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.