Duplex ultrasonography, magnetic resonance angiography, and computed tomography angiography for diagnosis and assessment of symptomatic, lower limb peripheral arterial disease: Systematic review

Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, England, United Kingdom
BMJ (online) (Impact Factor: 16.38). 07/2007; 334(7606):1257. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.39217.473275.55
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine the diagnostic accuracy of duplex ultrasonography, magnetic resonance angiography, and computed tomography angiography, alone or in combination, for the assessment of lower limb peripheral arterial disease; to evaluate the impact of these assessment methods on management of patients and outcomes; and to evaluate the evidence regarding attitudes of patients to these technologies and summarise available data on adverse events.
Systematic review.
Searches of 11 electronic databases (to April 2005), six journals, and reference lists of included papers for relevant studies. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed quality. Diagnostic accuracy studies were assessed for quality with the QUADAS checklist.
107 studies met the inclusion criteria; 58 studies provided data on diagnostic accuracy, one on outcomes in patients, four on attitudes of patients, and 44 on adverse events. Quality assessment highlighted limitations in the methods and quality of reporting. Most of the included studies reported results by arterial segment, rather than by limb or by patient, which does not account for the clustering of segments within patients, so specificities may be overstated. For the detection of stenosis of 50% or more in a lower limb vessel, contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography had the highest diagnostic accuracy with a median sensitivity of 95% (range 92-99.5%) and median specificity of 97% (64-99%). The results were 91% (89-99%) and 91% (83-97%) for computed tomography angiography and 88% (80-98%) and 96% (89-99%) for duplex ultrasonography. A controlled trial reported no significant differences in outcomes in patients after treatment plans based on duplex ultrasonography alone or conventional contrast angiography alone, though in 22% of patients supplementary contrast angiography was needed to form a treatment plan. The limited evidence available suggested that patients preferred magnetic resonance angiography (with or without contrast) to contrast angiography, with half expressing no preference between magnetic resonance angiography or duplex ultrasonography (among patients with no contraindications for magnetic resonance angiography, such as claustrophobia). Where data on adverse events were available, magnetic resonance angiography was associated with the highest proportion of adverse events, but these were mild. The most severe adverse events, although rare, were mainly associated with contrast angiography.
Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography seems to be more specific than computed tomography angiography (that is, better at ruling out stenosis over 50%) and more sensitive than duplex ultrasonography (that is, better at ruling in stenosis over 50%) and was generally preferred by patients over contrast angiography. Computed tomography angiography was also preferred by patients over contrast angiography; no data on patients' preference between duplex ultrasonography and contrast angiography were available. Where available, contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography might be a viable alternative to contrast angiography.

Download full-text


Available from: Marie Westwood, Aug 17, 2015
1 Follower
  • Source
    • "TcPO 2 is also used to define amputation levels as values of >50 mm Hg predict a good likelihood of surgical wound healing, whereas healing is uncertain at values of 30e50, and improbable at values of <30 [64]. Duplex ultrasonography (echo Doppler) allows the morphological/functional study of the vascular tree [65]. According to some experts, the information provided by duplex scans is sufficient to indicate which patients should undergo revascularisation, but others believe further diagnostic evaluations such as magnetic resonance (angio- MR) or computed tomography angiography (angio-CT) are necessary. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Diabetic foot (DF) is a chronic and highly disabling complication of diabetes. Prevalence of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is high in diabetic patients and, associated or not with peripheral neuropathy (PN), can be found in 50% of cases of DF. It is worth pointing out that the number of major amputations in diabetic patients it is still very high. Many PAD diabetic patients are not revascularized due lack of technical expertise of, ever worse, negative believes because of poor experience. This is despite the progresses obtained in the technics of distal revascularization that nowadays allow to re-open distal arteries of the leg and of the foot . Italy has one of the lowest prevalence rates of major amputations in Europe and we have a long tradition in the field of limb salvage with aggressive approach in debridment, antibiotic therapy and distal revascularization. Therefore we believe it is appropriate to produce a consensus document concerning the treatment of PAD and limb salvage in diabetic patients, based on the Italian experience in this field, to share with the scientific community.
    Nutrition, metabolism, and cardiovascular diseases: NMCD 01/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.numecd.2013.12.007 · 3.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In patients with CLI, contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) is a valuable alternative to DSA for treatment planning [1] [3] [5] [6]. However, the great variation of contrast agent travel times and venous contamination in patients with high-grade CLI may hinder the examination of the whole lower extremity with moving table and multiinjection techniques [5] [7]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The entire vascular tree of 58 lower extremities with high-grade critical limb ischemia (CLI) was assessed with three-station time resolved imaging of contrast kinetics (TRICKS) magnetic resonance angiography (T-MRA) and correlated with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) examinations and Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II (TASC II) guidelines. Kappa (κ) statistics were utilized to evaluate the agreement of stenosis scores (5-point scale; 0 normal to 4 occlusion) based on T-MRA and DSA. With DSA as the standard, significant stenosis instances (stenosis score ≥2) among vascular segments were compared. The κ-statistics of image quality (4-point scale; 1 nondiagnostic to 4 excellent) of T-MRA and TASC II classification assessed by a radiologist and a vascular surgeon were also evaluated. Among 870 vascular segments, excellent agreement was observed between T-MRA and DSA (mean κ = 0.883) in revealing stenosis (mean stenosis score, 2.1  ±  1.3 versus 2.0  ±  1.3). T-MRA harbored overall high sensitivity (99.5%), specificity (93.6%), positive predictive value (95.4%), negative predictive value (99.6%), and accuracy (97.7%) in depicting significant stenosis. Excellent interobserver agreement (mean κ = 0.818) of superb image quality (mean score = 3.5-3.6) of T-MRA and outstanding agreement of TASC II classification of aortoiliac and femoral-popliteal lesions (κ = 0.912-0.917) between two raters further verified the clinical feasibility of T-MRA for treatment planning.
    The Scientific World Journal 12/2012; 2012:192150. DOI:10.1100/2012/192150 · 1.73 Impact Factor
  • Source
Show more