Jackson M R, Chang A S, Robles H A, Gillespie D L, Olsen S B, Kaiser W J, Goff J M, O'Donnell S D, Rich N M
Department of Surgery, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Ann Vasc Surg. 1998 May;12(3):236-43. doi: 10.1007/s100169900146.
The morbidity and cost of conventional angiography (CA) have focused recent efforts in cerebrovascular imaging upon the exclusive use of noninvasive techniques. Our purpose was to prospectively evaluate carotid magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and to compare its accuracy with color-flow duplex (CFD). Fifty patients were prospectively evaluated with CA and MRA after clinical and CFD findings indicated the need for carotid angiography. CFD measurements of peak systolic velocity (PSV) and end-diastolic velocity (EDV) were made. MRA results were categorized as 0%-39%, 40%-59%, 60%-79%, or 80%-99% stenosis or occluded. Determination of percent carotid stenosis by CA was made as in the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET). Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, the probability of correctly predicting a > or =60% stenosis using various CFD thresholds and MRA was assessed. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) in determining > or =60% stenosis were estimated. For MRA the sensitivity was 85% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 69%-94%), specificity 70% (CI = 56%-81 %), PPV 68% (CI = 53%-80%), and NPV 86% (CI = 72%-94%). For CFD the sensitivity was 89% (CI = 74%-96%), specificity 93% (CI = 82%-98%), PPV 89% (CI = 74%-96%), and NPV 93% (CI = 82%-98%). When MRA and CFD results were concordant (n = 64), the sensitivity was 100% (CI = 89%-100%), specificity 95% (CI = 81%-99%), PPV 94% (CI = 77%-99%), and the NPV was 100% (CI = 92%-100%). The area under the ROC curve for CFD was 95%, compared to 83% for MRA (p = 0.0005). We conclude that the low specificity of MRA precludes its use as the definitive imaging modality for carotid stenosis. The 93% specificity of CFD alone warrants its consideration as a definitive carotid imaging study. By ROC curve analysis, CFD offers superior accuracy to MRA. Our data support noninvasive preoperative carotid imaging for detecting a threshold stenosis of > or =60% whether CFD is used alone, or in combination with the selective use of MRA.
传统血管造影(CA)的发病率和成本促使近期脑血管成像的研究重点转向仅使用非侵入性技术。我们的目的是前瞻性评估颈动脉磁共振血管造影(MRA),并将其准确性与彩色血流双功超声(CFD)进行比较。在临床和CFD检查结果表明需要进行颈动脉血管造影后,对50例患者进行了CA和MRA的前瞻性评估。测量了CFD的收缩期峰值速度(PSV)和舒张末期速度(EDV)。MRA结果分为狭窄0%-39%、40%-59%、60%-79%或80%-99%或闭塞。按照北美症状性颈动脉内膜切除术试验(NASCET)的方法通过CA确定颈动脉狭窄百分比。使用受试者操作特征(ROC)曲线,评估了使用各种CFD阈值和MRA正确预测≥60%狭窄的概率。估计了在确定≥60%狭窄时的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)。对于MRA,敏感性为85%(95%置信区间[CI]=69%-94%),特异性为70%(CI=56%-81%),PPV为68%(CI=53%-