ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Ankle Doppler for Cuffless Ankle Brachial Index Estimation and Peripheral Artery Disease Diagnosis Independent of Diabetes.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clustering Analysis of Ankle-Brachial Index Related Metabolic and Body Composition Profiles Using K-Means Approach.Vascular health and risk management · 2026Article
- Estimation of toe brachial index based on forefoot Doppler waveforms.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Article
- Low and High Ankle-Brachial Index Are Both Associated with Mortality in German Nursing Home Residents-The Five-Year Follow-Up of the "Allo-Study" Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI) is the first-line test to diagnose peripheral artery disease (PAD). Its adoption in clinical practice is poor and its validity, particularly in diabetes, is limited. We hypothesised that ABPI can be accurately and precisely estimated based on cuffless Doppler waveforms. Retrospective analysis of standard ABPI and handheld Doppler waveform characteristics (n = 200). Prospective analysis of angle-corrected Doppler acceleration index (AccI, n = 148) and standard ABPI with testing of performance to diagnose PAD as assessed with imaging reference standards in consecutive patients. The highest AccI from handheld Doppler at ankle arteries was significantly logarithmically associated with the highest standard ABPI (E[y] = 0.32 ln [1.71 ∗ x + 1], p < 0.001, R2 = 0.68, n = 100 limbs). Estimated ABPI (eABPI) based on AccI closely resembled ABPI (r = 0.81, p < 0.001, average deviation −0.01 ± 0.13 [SD], n = 100 limbs). AccI from angle-corrected Doppler in patients without overt media sclerosis (ABPI ≤ 1.1) improved ABPI prediction (E[y] = 0.297 ∗ ln[0.039 ∗ x + 1], R2 = 0.92, p = 0.006, average deviation 0.00 ± 0.08, n = 100). In a population (n = 148 limbs) including diabetes (56%), chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (51%) and media sclerosis (32%), receiver operating characteristics analysis of (angle-corrected) eABPI performed significantly better than standard ABPI to diagnose PAD defined by ultrasound (ROC AUC = 0.99 ± 0.01, p < 0.001; sensitivity: 97%, specificity: 96%) at the ≤0.9 cut-off. This was confirmed with CT angiography (ROC AUC = 0.98, p < 0.001, sensitivity: 97%, specificity: 100%) and was independent of the presence of diabetes (p = 0.608). ABPI can be estimated based on ankle Doppler AccI without compression, and eABPI performs better than standard ABPI to diagnose PAD independent of diabetes. eABPI has the potential to be included as a standard component of lower extremity ultrasound.
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.