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

13Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Johansson, E., Vanoli, D., Bråten-Johansson, I., Law, L., Aviv, R. I., & Fox, A. J. (2021). Near-occlusion is difficult to diagnose with common carotid ultrasound methods. Neuroradiology, 63(5), 721–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-021-02687-x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free