ArticleJournal of ultrasound2025
A comprehensive scoping review of existing carotid duplex ultrasound scanning and reporting protocols: identifying gaps and opportunities for standardization of practice in low-income countries.
Article in Journal of ultrasound, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuplex carotid ultrasound is a non-invasive imaging test that is essential for assessing carotid artery disease, particularly in determining the presence and severity of atherosclerosis and the risk of cerebrovascular events. However, the interpretation of ultrasound results can differ widely due to variations in diagnostic criteria, lack of standardization in scanning methods, and differing approaches to evaluating carotid intimal medial thickness (CIMT), plaques, and stenosis. These inconsistencies create challenges in clinical practice and the reproducibility of results. While various protocols for CIMT, plaque measurement, and stenosis grading are available in the literature, a standardized global protocol is still lacking. This article presents a scoping review of current carotid duplex ultrasound scanning and reporting protocols. It aims to identify existing protocols and guidelines for carotid ultrasound scanning and reporting, highlight variations, and propose a standardized approach to enhance diagnostic accuracy and clinical outcomes in carotid atherosclerosis.
methodsUsing predefined search protocols developed in collaboration with the specialized librarian from the University of Pretoria, we searched different databases and gray literature to identify existing protocols on carotid ultrasound including scanning technique, carotid intimal medial thickness, carotid plaques, and carotid stenosis grading. Due to limitations in the length of the review, and the existence of a large number of protocols, this review focused on the protocols developed and published by institutions and professional societies rather than individual articles.
resultsAmong 2496 articles identified from databases and 22 from other sources, 17 articles met the criteria for this review. The most common criteria that was found following this review are those established by the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound (SRU) in 2003. The researchers further noted that these criteria were, however, been criticized for relying heavily on peak systolic velocities, a measurement that, when used alone, can be misleading. Literature further demonstrated that other researchers and professional societies have called for consensus on unified criteria for the diagnosis of carotid atherosclerosis.
conclusionWhile carotid ultrasound is an important, non-invasive, and widely available method for evaluating carotid atherosclerosis, the variations in scanning techniques, measurements, and cut-off values underscore the need for standardized diagnostic criteria. Standardization is essential to provide consistent patient care and ensure accurate examination in various clinical settings. This will lead to the reduction of stroke and cardiovascular incidence which are the leading causes of death worldwide and more prevalent in low-income countries.
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.