Hayes A C, Mahler D K, Foldes M S, Michelini M A, Littooy F N, Baker W H
Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois 60153.
Ann Vasc Surg. 1987 May;1(4):469-73. doi: 10.1016/S0890-5096(06)60734-6.
Hand-held, continuous-wave Doppler probes, coupled with sound spectral analysis, can successfully predict carotid artery stenosis. Changing either the emitting frequency of the probe, the beam/artery angle of the carotid flow velocity (e.g. cardiac output) may alter the recorded frequency shifts. These effects raise questions as to the efficacy of this technique to serially follow carotid atheroma for progressive stenosis. To test the inherent problems with this methodology, a study of reproducibility was conducted. Two Doppler probes (5 MHz and 8 MHz) were compared at the same sitting in 24 patients; 12 were restudied on two subsequent occasions. Peak systolic frequency was 135% higher with the 8 MHz probe; this was lower than the 160% calculated by substitution for emitting frequency in the Doppler formula. The linear correlation coefficient of the two probes was 0.88. In relationship to established laboratory criteria of a greater than 75% area stenosis, no errors were noted with the 5 MHz probe while four errors were noted with the 8 MHz probe. A serial study variation of peak systolic frequency was noted for both probes; these variations did not cross established criteria levels of a severe stenosis when the 5 MHz probe was used, but did with the 8 MHz probe for two carotids. A standard examining probe is recommended. Angle and cardiac output changes do result in peak systolic frequency variation from test to test, but these were not clinically significant with the 5 MHz probe. Thus, significant changes during follow-up testing should provide an index of evolving carotid stenosis.
手持连续波多普勒探头结合声谱分析能够成功预测颈动脉狭窄。改变探头的发射频率、颈动脉血流速度的波束/动脉夹角(如心输出量)可能会改变记录的频移。这些影响引发了关于该技术连续跟踪颈动脉粥样硬化进展性狭窄疗效的疑问。为了测试该方法存在的固有问题,进行了一项重复性研究。在24例患者中于同一时间比较了两个多普勒探头(5兆赫和8兆赫);其中12例在随后的两个时间点再次接受检查。8兆赫探头测得的收缩期峰值频率高出135%;这低于通过多普勒公式代入发射频率计算得出的160%。两个探头的线性相关系数为0.88。与已确定的大于75%面积狭窄的实验室标准相比,5兆赫探头未发现误差,而8兆赫探头发现了4例误差。两个探头均记录到收缩期峰值频率的系列研究变化;使用5兆赫探头时这些变化未超过严重狭窄的既定标准水平,但使用8兆赫探头对两条颈动脉进行检查时出现了这种情况。推荐使用标准检查探头。角度和心输出量的变化确实会导致每次测试的收缩期峰值频率发生变化,但对于5兆赫探头而言这些变化不具有临床意义。因此,随访测试期间的显著变化应可作为颈动脉狭窄进展的指标。