ArticleJournal of vascular surgery2025
Duplex ultrasound may lead to misclassification of carotid artery stenosis.
Article in Journal of vascular surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCarotid duplex ultrasonography (CDUS) is often the first-line imaging modality for clinical evaluation of carotid disease. Despite improved equipment and standardization of vascular imaging protocols, CDUS can be technician-dependent and unreliable in calcified blood vessels. The aim of this study was to assess variability in carotid stenosis severity measured using CDUS compared with reference high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
methodsIn this prospective cohort study designed to study long-term brain health outcomes, we enrolled 123 participants with a diagnosis of asymptomatic carotid disease and/or ≥2 cardiovascular risk factors between the ages of 50 to 85 years from vascular and cardiology clinics in Tucson, Arizona, for the ongoing Carotids and Minds (CAM) study. Using a specialized radiofrequency coil for carotid imaging, high-resolution time-of-flight (0.63 × 0.63 × 1.0 mm
resultsA total of 246 carotid arteries were evaluated for percent stenosis using both MRI and clinical CDUS imaging. Twenty-five percent of the carotid arteries with severe (70%-99%) stenosis based on MRI were misclassified as having mild (<50%) or moderate (50%-69%) stenosis based on CDUS. Conversely, 33% of arteries with mild disease were overestimated by CDUS into higher stenosis categories. For detecting ≥70% carotid stenosis, clinical CDUS had a sensitivity of 0.77 (95% confidence interval, 0.67-0.87) and specificity of 0.92 (95% confidence interval, 0.88- 0.96), indicating a false negative rate of 23%.
conclusionsCDUS provides a rapid, noninvasive assessment of carotid disease in clinical settings, yet in this cohort, it misclassified carotid stenosis severity (both over and under) 32% of the time. Thus, reliance on CDUS alone could lead to inappropriate treatment decisions. High-resolution MR angiography or computed tomography angiography should be considered for more accurate stratification of disease severity in patients with asymptomatic carotid disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.