Sanborn G E, Miller N R, McGuire M, Kumar A J
Stroke. 1981 Nov-Dec;12(6):770-4. doi: 10.1161/01.str.12.6.770.
A prospective, clinical study was performed on patients with suspected carotid artery disease to compare the accuracy of compression and suction ophthalmodynamometry with carotid artery stenosis as determined by arteriography. Results were analyzed with respect to current criteria for classification and determination of "significant" carotid artery disease. Although our results suggest that the best correlation for both procedures with arteriography is a ratio of the corrected intraocular pressure to the systolic brachial blood pressure, these results were not statistically improved over those obtained using uncorrected systolic or diastolic values. Both suction and compression ophthalmodynamometry are equally accurate with levels approaching 80 percent; however, neither test is sensitive enough to be used alone as a screening technique. Arteriography remains the best procedure for the determination of carotid artery disease.
对疑似颈动脉疾病的患者进行了一项前瞻性临床研究,以比较压迫式和吸引式眼压描记法与动脉造影确定的颈动脉狭窄的准确性。根据当前“显著”颈动脉疾病的分类和判定标准对结果进行了分析。尽管我们的结果表明,这两种方法与动脉造影的最佳相关性是校正眼压与肱动脉收缩压的比值,但与使用未校正的收缩压或舒张压值获得的结果相比,这些结果在统计学上并未得到改善。吸引式和压迫式眼压描记法在接近80%的水平上同样准确;然而,这两种测试都不够敏感,不能单独用作筛查技术。动脉造影仍然是确定颈动脉疾病的最佳方法。