Neuroradiology · 2025
Rule-out and rule-in of carotid near-occlusion using color duplex ultrasound.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Skoog Johan, Vanoli Davide, Henze Alexander, Fox Allan J, Johansson Elias
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Diagnosing carotid near-occlusion (CNO) with colour duplex ultrasound (CDU) is challenging. We hypothesised that CNO is associated with a reduced distal internal carotid artery (ICA) velocity and aimed to assess if distal velocity is able to diagnose CNO accurately. If not, we aimed to develop CDU rule-out and rule-in criteria to diagnose CNO.
METHODS: This is a prospective cross-sectional study in consecutive participants with suspected ≥ 50% carotid stenosis on CT angiography (CTA). CDU velocities in the common carotid artery, the stenosis and distal to the stenosis were examined. CTAs were assessed for CNO, serving as a reference test. If no CDU parameter was both sensitive and specific for CNO, rule-out (98% sensitive) and rule-in (99% specific) criteria were created.
RESULTS: Of the 315 included participants with ≥ 50% stenosis, 190 (60%) were conventional ≥ 50% stenosis and 125 (40%) CNO. No CDU parameter was both sensitive and specific for CNO. The best exclusion criteria were stenosis end diastolic velocity (EDV) ≤ 63 cm/s and/or distal peak systolic velocity (PSV) > 23 cm/s, seen in 115 (38%) participants. The best rule-in criteria were stenosis EDV ≥ 280 cm/s and/or distal PSV ≤ 23 cm/s, seen in 35 (12%) participants. Of the remaining participants, 143 (47%) were uncertain (74 CNOs) and 9 (3%) were misdiagnosed as carotid occlusion (all CNOs).
CONCLUSIONS: CDU alone cannot diagnose CNO but can rule in or rule out CNO in half of participants with ≥ 50% stenosis. These criteria are intended for inclusion in an algorithm, sorting cases needing further exams, such as CTA and/or phase-contrast magnetic resonance angiography.
METHODS: This is a prospective cross-sectional study in consecutive participants with suspected ≥ 50% carotid stenosis on CT angiography (CTA). CDU velocities in the common carotid artery, the stenosis and distal to the stenosis were examined. CTAs were assessed for CNO, serving as a reference test. If no CDU parameter was both sensitive and specific for CNO, rule-out (98% sensitive) and rule-in (99% specific) criteria were created.
RESULTS: Of the 315 included participants with ≥ 50% stenosis, 190 (60%) were conventional ≥ 50% stenosis and 125 (40%) CNO. No CDU parameter was both sensitive and specific for CNO. The best exclusion criteria were stenosis end diastolic velocity (EDV) ≤ 63 cm/s and/or distal peak systolic velocity (PSV) > 23 cm/s, seen in 115 (38%) participants. The best rule-in criteria were stenosis EDV ≥ 280 cm/s and/or distal PSV ≤ 23 cm/s, seen in 35 (12%) participants. Of the remaining participants, 143 (47%) were uncertain (74 CNOs) and 9 (3%) were misdiagnosed as carotid occlusion (all CNOs).
CONCLUSIONS: CDU alone cannot diagnose CNO but can rule in or rule out CNO in half of participants with ≥ 50% stenosis. These criteria are intended for inclusion in an algorithm, sorting cases needing further exams, such as CTA and/or phase-contrast magnetic resonance angiography.