Patel S G, Collie D A, Wardlaw J M, Lewis S C, Wright A R, Gibson R J, Sellar R J
Department of Neuroradiology, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002 Jul;73(1):21-8. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.73.1.21.
To evaluate the accuracy of routinely available non-invasive tests (spiral computed tomographic angiography (CTA), time of flight magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), and colour Doppler ultrasound (DUS)), individually and together, compared with intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (DSA) in patients with symptomatic tight carotid stenosis; and to assess the effect of substituting non-invasive tests for DSA on outcome, interobserver variability, and patient preference.
Patients referred from a neurovascular clinic were subjected prospectively to DUS imaging. The operator was blind to symptoms. Patients with a tight carotid stenosis on the symptomatic side were admitted for DSA. CTA and MRA were performed during the admission. The CTA, MRA, and DSA films were each read independently by two of six experienced radiologists, blind to all other data.
67 patients were included (34 had all four imaging procedures). DUS, CTA, and MRA all agreed with DSA in the diagnosis of operable v non-operable disease in about 80% of patients. CTA tended to underestimate (sensitivity 0.65, specificity 1.0), MRA to overestimate (sensitivity 1.0, specificity 0.57), and DUS to agree most closely with (sensitivity 0.85, specificity 0.71) the degree of stenosis as shown by DSA. When using any two of the three non-invasive tests in combination, adding the third if the first two disagreed would result in very few misdiagnoses (about 6%). MRA had similar interobserver variability to CTA (both worse than DSA). Patients preferred CTA over MRA and DSA.
DUS, CTA, and MRA all show similar accuracy in the diagnosis of symptomatic carotid stenosis. No technique on its own is accurate enough to replace DSA. Two non-invasive techniques in combination, and adding a third if the first two disagree, appears more accurate, but may still result in diagnostic errors.
评估常规可用的非侵入性检查(螺旋计算机断层血管造影(CTA)、时间飞跃磁共振血管造影(MRA)和彩色多普勒超声(DUS))单独及联合使用时,与症状性重度颈动脉狭窄患者的动脉内数字减影血管造影(DSA)相比的准确性;并评估用非侵入性检查替代DSA对结果、观察者间变异性和患者偏好的影响。
前瞻性地对从神经血管诊所转诊的患者进行DUS成像检查。检查者对患者症状不知情。症状侧有重度颈动脉狭窄的患者入院进行DSA检查。入院期间进行CTA和MRA检查。CTA、MRA和DSA图像分别由六位经验丰富的放射科医生中的两位独立阅片,阅片者对所有其他数据均不知情。
纳入67例患者(34例接受了全部四种成像检查)。DUS、CTA和MRA在诊断可手术与不可手术疾病方面与DSA的一致性在约80%的患者中。CTA倾向于低估(敏感性0.65,特异性1.0),MRA倾向于高估(敏感性1.0,特异性0.57),而DUS与DSA显示的狭窄程度最为接近(敏感性0.85,特异性0.71)。当联合使用三种非侵入性检查中的任意两种时,如果前两种结果不一致则加入第三种检查,误诊情况会非常少(约6%)。MRA的观察者间变异性与CTA相似(两者均比DSA差)。患者更喜欢CTA而非MRA和DSA。
DUS、CTA和MRA在症状性颈动脉狭窄诊断中显示出相似的准确性。没有一种技术本身足够准确到可以替代DSA。两种非侵入性技术联合使用,如果前两种不一致则加入第三种,似乎更准确,但仍可能导致诊断错误。