Xiong Jian-Qun, Wang Li, Yu Chen, Shi Yu-Wen, Li Ying-Hua
Department of Medical Ultrasound, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, 510260, China.
J Clin Ultrasound. 2013 Sep;41(7):408-14. doi: 10.1002/jcu.22022. Epub 2012 Dec 20.
To assess the benefits of using a low-frequency convex probe and detecting ophthalmic artery blood flow for the differential diagnosis of occlusion from severe stenosis of the internal carotid artery (ICA).
A total of 103 patients were enrolled and had three sequential examinations by an experienced sonographer. First, the proximal ICA was examined with a 5.0-7.5-MHz linear probe. Second, the distal ICA was examined with a 3.5-5.0-MHz convex probe. Third, the ophthalmic artery (OA) was examined with a 5.0-7.5-MHz linear probe. Three parallel sets of diagnoses were made based on results from (1) high-frequency ultrasonography; (2) combined use of high- and low-frequency ultrasonography; and (3) combined use of high- and low-frequency ultrasonography along with OAs examination findings. Efficiencies of the three diagnoses were compared by receiver operating characteristic curves with digital subtraction angiography as the gold standard.
The second diagnostic approach yielded the highest sensitivity (96.6%) and specificity (94.5%). OA blood flow was reversed in most, but not all, cases of ICA occlusion (27/29). Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of the three diagnoses were significantly different (p < 0.05).
The diagnostic performance of combined high- and low-frequency ultrasonography is greater than that of high-frequency ultrasonography alone. Although OA examination does not increase the diagnostic performance, it provides helpful data for the assessment of hemodynamics and collateral circulation.
评估使用低频凸阵探头检测眼动脉血流对鉴别颈内动脉(ICA)闭塞与严重狭窄的益处。
共纳入103例患者,由经验丰富的超声检查医师进行三次连续检查。首先,使用5.0 - 7.5MHz线性探头检查ICA近端。其次,使用3.5 - 5.0MHz凸阵探头检查ICA远端。第三,使用5.0 - 7.5MHz线性探头检查眼动脉(OA)。基于以下结果做出三组平行诊断:(1)高频超声检查;(2)高频与低频超声联合使用;(3)高频与低频超声联合使用以及OA检查结果。以数字减影血管造影为金标准,通过受试者操作特征曲线比较三种诊断方法的效能。
第二种诊断方法具有最高的敏感性(96.6%)和特异性(94.5%)。在大多数(但并非全部)ICA闭塞病例(27/29)中,眼动脉血流发生逆转。三种诊断方法的受试者操作特征曲线下面积存在显著差异(p < 0.05)。
高频与低频超声联合使用的诊断效能高于单独使用高频超声。虽然OA检查并未提高诊断效能,但它为评估血流动力学和侧支循环提供了有用的数据。