Peripheral Arterial Disease: Therapeutic Confidence of CT versus Digital Subtraction Angiography and Effects on Additional Imaging Recommendations1
ABSTRACT To compare multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) angiography and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) prior to revascularization in patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease for the purpose of assessing recommendations for additional imaging and physician confidence ratings for chosen therapy.
In a randomized controlled trial, 73 patients were assigned to CT angiography, and 72 were assigned to DSA. Physician confidence in the treatment decision was measured as a continuous outcome on a scale of 0-10 (uncertain to certain) and as a dichotomous outcome (further imaging recommended, yes or no). Mean confidence scores and additional imaging recommendations were compared between CT and DSA groups in an intention-to-diagnose-and-treat analysis. To detect trends in confidence, confidence scores were plotted over time, and multiple linear regression analysis was performed. To detect trends in additional imaging recommendations, logistic regression analysis was used. Data from eligible nonrandomized patients were analyzed separately.
No statistically significant difference in baseline characteristics between randomized groups was found. CT had a lower confidence score than did DSA (7.2 vs 8.2, P < .001). Further imaging was recommended more often after CT (25 of 71 patients, 35%) than after DSA (nine of 66 patients, 14%; P = .003). Analysis of trends demonstrated increasing (but not statistically significant) confidence in CT and stable confidence in DSA. No significant difference was found in baseline characteristics between randomized and nonrandomized patients. Among nonrandomized patients, no significant difference in mean confidence score (8.2 vs 8.3, P = .26) was found between CT (n = 24) and DSA (n = 26).
With CT angiography, physician confidence decreases with an associated increase in additional imaging prior to revascularization in patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease. Given that CT is less invasive than DSA, results suggest that CT may replace DSA in selected cases.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Lower extremity arterial disease (LEAD) affects millions of Americans, causing impaired function and a high risk of nonhealing wounds, infection, and limb loss. This chronic, progressive condition is often silent until a life- or limb-threatening complication occurs and impacts the quality of life of individuals and their families and results in high healthcare costs. Assessment forms the cornerstone of effective nursing care, yet despite several national guidelines, LEAD remains unrecognized in half of persons with the condition. This article presents an overview of assessment of LEAD, including descriptions of the risks, pathogenesis, and common characteristics of arterial disease.The Journal of cardiovascular nursing 01/2008; 23(2):144-52. DOI:10.1097/01.JCN.0000305071.41989.03 · 2.05 Impact Factor
- RöFo - Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der R 01/2005; 177(11):1562-1570. DOI:10.1055/s-2005-858486 · 1.40 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To prospectively evaluate clinical utility, patient outcomes, and costs of contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography compared with multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) angiography for initial imaging in the diagnostic work-up of patients with peripheral arterial disease. Institutional review board approval and informed consent were obtained. Patients referred for diagnostic imaging work-up to evaluate the feasibility of a revascularization procedure were randomly assigned to undergo either MR angiography or CT angiography. Clinical utility was assessed with therapeutic confidence (scale of 0-10) at initial imaging and with the need for additional imaging. Patient outcomes included ankle-brachial index, maximum walking distance, change in clinical status, and health-related quality of life. Actual diagnostic and therapeutic costs were calculated from the hospital perspective. Differences between group means were calculated with unpaired t tests and 95% confidence intervals. A total of 157 consecutive patients with peripheral arterial disease were prospectively randomized to undergo MR angiography (51 men, 27 women; mean age, 63 years) or CT angiography (50 men, 29 women; mean age, 64 years). For one of the 78 patients in the MR group, no data were available. Mean confidence for MR angiography (7.7) was slightly lower than that for CT angiography (8.0, P = .8). During 6 months of follow-up, 13 patients in the MR group compared with 10 patients in the CT group underwent additional vascular imaging (P = .5). Although not statistically significant, there was a consistent trend of less improvement in the MR group across all patient outcomes. The average cost for diagnostic imaging was 359 ($438) higher in the MR group than in the CT group (95% confidence interval: 209, 511 [$255, $623]; P < .001). Therapeutic costs were higher in the MR group, but the difference was not significant. The results suggest that CT angiography has some advantages over MR angiography in the initial evaluation of peripheral arterial disease.Radiology 09/2005; 236(3):1094-103. DOI:10.1148/radiol.2363041140 · 6.87 Impact Factor