Hood D B, Mattos M A, Mansour A, Ramsey D E, Hodgson K J, Barkmeier L D, Sumner D S
Department of Surgery, Section of Peripheral Vascular Surgery, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield 62794-9230, USA.
J Vasc Surg. 1996 Feb;23(2):254-61; discussion 261-2. doi: 10.1016/s0741-5214(96)70269-0.
Large multicenter trials (North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial, European Carotid Surgery Trial) have documented the benefits of carotid endarterectomy for treating symptomatic patients with >or=70% stenosis of the internal carotid artery. Although color-flow duplex scanning has become the preferred method for noninvasive assessment of internal carotid artery disease, no criteria have been generally accepted to identify this subset of patients. We previously reported a retrospective series to establish such criteria. This study details our results when these criteria were applied prospectively.
Carotid color-flow duplex scans were compared with arteriograms in 457 patients who underwent both studies. Criteria for >or=70% internal carotid artery stenosis were peak systolic velocity >130 cm/sec and end-diastolic velocity >100 cm/sec. Internal carotid arteries with peak systolic velocity <40 cm/sec in which only a trickle of flow could be detected were classified as preocclusive lesions (95% to 99% stenosis). Arteriographic stenosis was determined by comparing the diameter of the internal carotid artery at the site of maximal stenosis to the diameter of the normal distal internal carotid artery.
Internal carotid artery stenosis of >or=70% was detected with a sensitivity of 87%, specificity of 97% positive predictive value of 89%, negative predictive value of 96%, and overall accuracy of 95%. Eighty-seven percent of 70% to 99% stenoses were correctly identified. False-positive errors (n=10) were attributed to contralateral internal carotid artery occlusion or high-grade (>90%) stenosis (n=5) and to interpreter error (n=1); no explanation was apparent in the other four. Eleven of 12 false-negative examinations occurred in patients with 70% to 80% internal carotid artery stenosis.
In our laboratories, prospective application of the above velocity criteria identified internal carotid artery stenosis of >or=70% with a reasonably high degree of accuracy. Errors occurred when stenoses were borderline and in patients with severe contralateral disease. With suitably modified velocity criteria, color-flow duplex scanning remains the most reliable noninvasive method for identifying symptomatic patients who are candidates for carotid endarterectomy.
大型多中心试验(北美症状性颈动脉内膜切除术试验、欧洲颈动脉外科手术试验)已证明颈动脉内膜切除术对治疗症状性颈内动脉狭窄≥70%的患者有益。尽管彩色血流双功扫描已成为无创评估颈内动脉疾病的首选方法,但尚未有普遍接受的标准来识别这部分患者。我们之前报告了一项回顾性系列研究以确立此类标准。本研究详细阐述了前瞻性应用这些标准时的结果。
对457例同时接受了颈动脉彩色血流双功扫描和动脉造影的患者进行了比较。颈内动脉狭窄≥70%的标准为收缩期峰值流速>130 cm/秒且舒张末期流速>100 cm/秒。收缩期峰值流速<40 cm/秒且仅能检测到微量血流的颈内动脉被归类为闭塞前病变(95%至99%狭窄)。动脉造影狭窄通过比较颈内动脉最大狭窄部位的直径与正常远端颈内动脉的直径来确定。
检测到颈内动脉狭窄≥70%的灵敏度为87%,特异度为97%,阳性预测值为89%,阴性预测值为96%,总体准确率为95%。70%至99%狭窄中的87%被正确识别。假阳性错误(n = 10)归因于对侧颈内动脉闭塞或高度(>90%)狭窄(n = 5)以及解读错误(n = 1);其他4例无明显原因。12例假阴性检查中有11例发生在颈内动脉狭窄70%至80%的患者中。
在我们的实验室中,前瞻性应用上述流速标准能以相当高的准确度识别颈内动脉狭窄≥70%的情况。当狭窄处于临界状态以及对侧有严重疾病的患者中会出现错误。通过适当修改流速标准,彩色血流双功扫描仍然是识别适合颈动脉内膜切除术的症状性患者的最可靠无创方法。