Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34859177›Full record

ArticleRheumatology advances in practice2021

Colour Doppler ultrasound and the giant cell arteritis probability score for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis: a Canadian single-centre experience.

Farah Zarka, Maxime Rhéaume, Meriem Belhocine, Michelle Goulet, Guillaume Febrer, Anne-Marie Mansour, Yves Troyanov, Tara Starnino, Rosalie-Sélène Meunier, Isabelle Chagnon and 5 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Rheumatology advances in practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05703763 (The Applanation Tonometry in Giant Cell Arteritis Pilot), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05703763 active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

The Applanation Tonometry in Giant Cell Arteritis Pilot

TypeobservationalSponsorCentre Integre Universitaire de Sante et Services Sociaux du Nord de l'ile de MontrealRan2025 to 2027Enrolled146ConditionsGiant Cell ArteritisArmsApplanation tonometry, Standardized GCA assessment, Repeat applanation tonometry (optional)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Farah ZarkaVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4374-546X
Maxime RhéaumeVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.
Meriem BelhocineVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.
Michelle GouletVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.
Guillaume FebrerDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery.
Anne-Marie MansourVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.
Yves TroyanovDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Tara StarninoDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Rosalie-Sélène MeunierVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.
Isabelle ChagnonVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.
Nathalie RouthierVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.
Valérie BénardVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.
Stéphanie Ducharme-BénardVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.
Carolyn RossVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2891-3245
Jean-Paul MakhzoumVasculitis Clinic, Department of Medicine.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4523-8525
Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal · CACenter for Vascular Biology Research · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim was to compare the accuracy of colour Doppler ultrasonography (CDUS) and temporal artery biopsy (TAB) to establish the final diagnosis of GCA and to determine how the GCA probability score (GCAPS) performs as a risk stratification tool.

methodsDescriptive statistics were performed on a retrospective cohort of patients referred to our vasculitis referral centre between 1 July 2017 and 1 October 2020 for suspected GCA. CDUS, TAB, centre-specific TAB (vasculitis centre

resultsData from 198 patients were included: 60 patients with GCA and 138 patients without GCA. Sixty-two patients had a TAB. Using the final diagnosis by a GCA expert as a reference, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 93.3%, 98.5%, 96.6% and 97.1% for CDUS and 69.2%, 100%, 100% and 81.8% for TAB, respectively. The false-negative rate was 6.7% for CDUS and 30.8% for TAB. False-negative TAB mostly occurred when performed in referring hospitals (57.1%) as opposed to our vasculitis centre (21.1%). With a cut-off at 9.5 points, sensitivity for GCAPS was 98.3% and specificity 74.3%.

conclusionCDUS of the temporal and axillary arteries showed a high sensitivity and specificity and helped to diagnose GCA in patients with negative TAB. We validated that GCAPS is a useful clinical tool, with a score of <9.5 making the diagnosis of GCA improbable.

Indexed as

colour Doppler ultrasonographyGCAprobability scoretemporal arteries

Identifiers

PMID34859177
PMCPMC8633428
OpenAlexW3214628510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.