Schmidt P, Sliwka U, Simon S G, Noth J
Department of Neurology, Technical University of Aachen, Germany.
J Clin Ultrasound. 1998 Feb;26(2):85-9. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0096(199802)26:2<85::aid-jcu6>3.0.co;2-e.
Visualization of carotid artery stenosis is important to improve our understanding of the etiology of ischemic stroke. Two sonographic methods are available for visualizing carotid stenosis: power Doppler imaging (PDI) and color Doppler imaging (CDI). The purpose of this study was to compare the advantages and limitations of these methods in the evaluation of internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis.
Thirty-two patients with at least 70% extracranial ICA stenosis were included in this prospective study. All subjects were examined with CDI and PDI. Four criteria were used to evaluate diagnostic accuracy and overall efficacy: identifying the target vessel, determining the causal pathology, evaluating blood flow, and the examiner's confidence in the diagnosis.
All patients had high-grade stenosis (17 patients had 70% stenosis, 11 had 80%, 2 had 90% and 2 had pseudo-occlusions of the ICA). PDI was significantly (p < 0.05) superior to CDI in identifying the target vessel and highly significantly (p < 0.01) superior to CDI in evaluating blood flow. There were no significant differences between CDI and PDI in determining the causal pathology or in the examiner's confidence in the diagnosis.
This study demonstrates that PDI is a good additional method to CDI and should be used with it to evaluate ICA stenosis.
可视化颈动脉狭窄对于增进我们对缺血性中风病因的理解很重要。有两种超声方法可用于可视化颈动脉狭窄:能量多普勒成像(PDI)和彩色多普勒成像(CDI)。本研究的目的是比较这些方法在评估颈内动脉(ICA)狭窄方面的优缺点。
本前瞻性研究纳入了32例颅外ICA狭窄至少70%的患者。所有受试者均接受了CDI和PDI检查。使用四个标准来评估诊断准确性和总体疗效:识别目标血管、确定病因病理、评估血流以及检查者对诊断的信心。
所有患者均有重度狭窄(17例患者有70%的狭窄,11例有80%,2例有90%,2例有ICA假性闭塞)。在识别目标血管方面,PDI显著优于CDI(p < 0.05),在评估血流方面,PDI极显著优于CDI(p < 0.01)。在确定病因病理或检查者对诊断的信心方面,CDI和PDI之间没有显著差异。
本研究表明,PDI是CDI的一种很好的辅助方法,应与CDI一起用于评估ICA狭窄。