ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2022
Comparison of Doppler Ultrasound and Digital Subtraction Angiography in extracranial stenosis.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- ABCD2 improves the diagnostic accuracy of carotid artery stenosis when combined with CT angiography.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Hemodynamics in Doppler ultrasonography.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2024Article
- Correlation between Ultrasound Peak Systolic Velocity and Angiography for Grading Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEvaluating the degree of extracranial stenosis is important in predicting the risk of cerebrovascular events and to assess if the patient can benefit from any intervention. Non-invasive methods, like Doppler Ultrasonography (DUS) are preferred to invasive methods such as Digital Subtraction Angiography (DSA).
methodsIn this retrospective study, the level of agreement between DUS and DSA regarding the degree of stenosis of Internal Carotid Arteries (ICAs) and Vertebral Arteries (VAs) was assessed. The degree of ICA stenosis was classified into 5 groups. DSA was assumed as the gold standard. VA stenosis was classified into two groups of more or less than 50% stenosis.
resultsA total of 428 ICAs were assessed. Based on DSA results, DUS could estimate the degree of arterial stenosis in groups of 0-15% stenosis and 100% stenosis most accurately, and the least accuracy was in groups of 50-69% and 70-99% stenosis. The overall agreement between DUS and DSA in the classified ICA stenosis was moderate (Weighted Kappa = 0.565, P < 0.001). Also, the agreement of DUS and DSA when classifying ICA stenosis into two groups of above and below 50%, was moderate (Kappa = 0.583, P < 0.001). DUS was most sensitive and specific in the group of 100% stenosis (Sensitivity: 0.75 Specificity: 0.99) as well as the group of 1-15% stenosis (Sensitivity: 0.80 Specificity: 0.76). Also, DUS was least sensitive in group of 50-69% stenosis (Sensitivity: 0.11 Specificity: 0.94). Regarding VAS, 108 arteries were assessed and the agreement between DUS and DSA was fair (Kappa = 0.248, CI95 = -0.013 - 0.509, P < 0.01).
conclusionsDUS can be used as the first-line screening tool for detecting extra cranial arteries stenosis. The practicality of the DUS as a screening tool for extracranial VAs stenosis appears to be limited.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.