Normahani P, Aslam M, Martin G, Standfield N J, Jaffer U
Department of Vascular Surgery, Imperial College School of Medicine, UK
Department of Vascular Surgery, Imperial College School of Medicine, UK.
Perfusion. 2015 Nov;30(8):636-42. doi: 10.1177/0267659115573280. Epub 2015 Feb 23.
Duplex US (DUS) is increasingly utilised as a first-line investigation for the assessment of carotid disease. For clinical decision-making, DUS assessment must be accurate and reproducible to ensure reliability. We aimed to investigate the variability in peak systolic velocity (PSV) measurement in a multi-site vascular network.
DUS measurements of PSV were taken from continuous and pulsatile flow, generated by a high fidelity phantom, by 12 experienced vascular scientists across four hospitals. Participants were blinded to the actual PSV value (50 cm/s).
We observed an average error of 13.2% (± 8.3) and 11.6% (± 7.5) in PSV measurements taken from pulsatile and continuous waveforms, respectively. Measurements of PSV using the pulsatile waveform demonstrated statistically significant variation across all hospitals; ((hospital/mean) A 43.9 cm/s, B 61.7 cm/s, C 57.4 cm/s, D 47.7 cm/s, p=0.001). Further analysis demonstrated statistically significant variation in 4 instrumentation-related factors when measuring from a pulsatile waveform (Doppler angle, angle of insonation, velocity range, scale range).
We observed a significant level of error and variation in PSV measurements across four sites within our vascular network. Variation in instrumentation-related factors may be accountable for this. In light of the centralisation of vascular services, it is increasingly important to unify and implement scanning protocols in order to reduce error and inter-site variability.
双功超声(DUS)越来越多地被用作评估颈动脉疾病的一线检查方法。为了进行临床决策,DUS评估必须准确且可重复,以确保可靠性。我们旨在研究多站点血管网络中收缩期峰值流速(PSV)测量的变异性。
由12名经验丰富的血管科学家在四家医院对高保真模型产生的连续和搏动血流进行PSV的DUS测量。参与者对实际PSV值(50 cm/s)不知情。
我们观察到,从搏动波形和连续波形测量PSV时,平均误差分别为13.2%(±8.3)和11.6%(±7.5)。使用搏动波形测量PSV在所有医院中显示出统计学上的显著差异;((医院/平均值)A 43.9 cm/s,B 61.7 cm/s,C 57.4 cm/s,D 47.7 cm/s,p = 0.001)。进一步分析表明,从搏动波形测量时,4个仪器相关因素存在统计学上的显著差异(多普勒角度、入射角度、速度范围、量程范围)。
我们观察到血管网络内四个站点的PSV测量存在显著误差和变异性。仪器相关因素的变化可能是造成这种情况的原因。鉴于血管服务的集中化,统一并实施扫描协议以减少误差和站点间变异性变得越来越重要。