ArticleArthritis research & therapy2023
Ultrasound halo count in the differential diagnosis of atherosclerosis and large vessel giant cell arteritis.
Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2023. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic vascular changes on long-term ultrasound monitoring predict relapse in large-vessel giant cell arteritis.Arthritis research & therapy · 2026Article
- A prospective cohort study evaluating the role of quantifying sonographic inflammatory changes in GCA.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2025Article
- 18F-FDG-PET/CT Scan for Detection of Large Vessel Involvement in Giant Cell Arteritis: Arteser Spanish Registry.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- What is new in imaging to assist in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis and Takayasu's arteritis since the EULAR and ACR/VF recommendations?Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the diagnostic discriminant validity between large vessel giant cell arteritis (LV-GCA) and atherosclerosis using ultrasound (US) intima-media thickness (IMT) measurements.
methodsWe included 44 patients with LV-GCA and 42 with high-risk atherosclerosis. US examinations of the axillary, subclavian, and common carotid arteries (CCA) were systematically performed using a MylabX8 system (Genoa, Italy) with a 4-15-MHz probe. IMT ≥ 1 mm was accepted as pathological.
resultsThe LV-GCA cohort included 24 females and 20 males with a mean age of 72.8 ± 7.6 years. The atherosclerosis group included 25 males and 17 females with a mean age of 70.8 ± 6.5 years. The mean IMT values of all arteries included were significantly higher in LV-GCA than in atherosclerosis. Among LV-GCA patients, IMT ≥ 1 mm was seen in 31 axillary, 30 subclavian, and 28 CCA. In the atherosclerotic cohort, 17 (38.6%) had IMT ≥ 1 mm with axillary involvement in 2 patients, subclavian in 3 patients, carotid distal in 14 patients (5 bilateral), and isolated carotid proximal affectation in 1 case. A cutoff point greater than 1 pathological vessel in the summative count of axillary and subclavian arteries or at least 3 vessels in the count of six vessels, including CCA, showed a precision upper 95% for GCA diagnosis.
conclusionThe IMT is higher in LV-GCA than in atherosclerosis. The proposed US halo count achieves an accuracy of > 95% for the differential diagnosis between LV-GCA and atherosclerosis. The axillary and subclavian arteries have higher discriminatory power, while carotid involvement is less specific in the differential diagnosis.
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.