Quantitative Techniques of Ultrasonography in the Assessment of Femoropopliteal Atherosclerotic Lesions Using Peak Systolic Velocity Ratio: Results From the TURN-UP Study.

IF 1.7 2区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Journal of Endovascular Therapy Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-16 DOI:10.1177/15266028231160636
Aiko Hayashi, Mitsuyoshi Takahara, Masahiko Fujihara, Yumiko Komiya, Shun Aoki, Mina Enoki, Takamitsu Miyauchi, Rika Tanimoto, Jun Fujisaki, Keisuke Ishida, Masayuki Yamasaki, Naoto Waratani, Harumi Kawaguchi, Terutoshi Yamaoka
{"title":"Quantitative Techniques of Ultrasonography in the Assessment of Femoropopliteal Atherosclerotic Lesions Using Peak Systolic Velocity Ratio: Results From the TURN-UP Study.","authors":"Aiko Hayashi, Mitsuyoshi Takahara, Masahiko Fujihara, Yumiko Komiya, Shun Aoki, Mina Enoki, Takamitsu Miyauchi, Rika Tanimoto, Jun Fujisaki, Keisuke Ishida, Masayuki Yamasaki, Naoto Waratani, Harumi Kawaguchi, Terutoshi Yamaoka","doi":"10.1177/15266028231160636","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Duplex ultrasound (DUS)-measured peak systolic velocity ratios (PSVRs) are commonly used to evaluate arterial stenosis in lower extremity artery disease (LEAD). However, these measurement methods have not yet been standardized. This study aimed to reveal the influence of measuring methods on PSVR values.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 132 femoropopliteal lesions with PSVR ranging from 1.5 to 3.5 evaluated using method A (angle correction 60°, the direction of blood flow, the no or few atherosclerotic changes closest to the lesion proximal side was defined as the nonstenotic area) were included. The following 4 different methods were then compared with method A: method B, angle correction 45°; method C, angle correction 60° measured along the vessel wall; D, angle correction 60°, with the nonstenotic area the lowest peak systolic velocity area; and E, angle correction 60°, with the reference point fixed at 2 cm proximal to the target lesion area. The difference in PSVR values was analyzed using the Bland-Altman method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean PSVR value measured by method A was 2.27±0.51, those measured by methods B, C, D, and E were 2.21±0.55, 2.31±0.66, 2.34±0.63, and 2.11±0.63, respectively. The 95% prediction intervals of the differences in PSVR measurements versus A were -0.64 to +0.53 for method B, -0.59 to +0.68 for method C, -0.77 to +0.91 for method D, and -1.12 to +0.79 for method E.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PSVR values considerably differed between measuring methods. PSVR values by DUS are largely dependent on the measurement methods, which could considerably affect the judgment of LEAD.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>Due to differences in several DUS measurement methods, the PSVR results could be changed. Therefore, to need further investigations and unification of measurement method.</p>","PeriodicalId":50210,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1075-1080"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028231160636","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Duplex ultrasound (DUS)-measured peak systolic velocity ratios (PSVRs) are commonly used to evaluate arterial stenosis in lower extremity artery disease (LEAD). However, these measurement methods have not yet been standardized. This study aimed to reveal the influence of measuring methods on PSVR values.

Methods: A 132 femoropopliteal lesions with PSVR ranging from 1.5 to 3.5 evaluated using method A (angle correction 60°, the direction of blood flow, the no or few atherosclerotic changes closest to the lesion proximal side was defined as the nonstenotic area) were included. The following 4 different methods were then compared with method A: method B, angle correction 45°; method C, angle correction 60° measured along the vessel wall; D, angle correction 60°, with the nonstenotic area the lowest peak systolic velocity area; and E, angle correction 60°, with the reference point fixed at 2 cm proximal to the target lesion area. The difference in PSVR values was analyzed using the Bland-Altman method.

Results: The mean PSVR value measured by method A was 2.27±0.51, those measured by methods B, C, D, and E were 2.21±0.55, 2.31±0.66, 2.34±0.63, and 2.11±0.63, respectively. The 95% prediction intervals of the differences in PSVR measurements versus A were -0.64 to +0.53 for method B, -0.59 to +0.68 for method C, -0.77 to +0.91 for method D, and -1.12 to +0.79 for method E.

Conclusion: PSVR values considerably differed between measuring methods. PSVR values by DUS are largely dependent on the measurement methods, which could considerably affect the judgment of LEAD.

Clinical impact: Due to differences in several DUS measurement methods, the PSVR results could be changed. Therefore, to need further investigations and unification of measurement method.

使用峰值收缩速度比评估股动脉粥样硬化病变的超声定量技术:TURN-UP研究的结果。
目的:双相超声(DUS)测量的峰值收缩速度比(PSVR)通常用于评估下肢动脉疾病(LEAD)的动脉狭窄情况。然而,这些测量方法尚未标准化。本研究旨在揭示测量方法对 PSVR 值的影响:方法:共纳入 132 个股腘动脉病变,这些病变的 PSVR 值在 1.5 至 3.5 之间,采用 A 方法(角度校正 60°,血流方向,最靠近病变近侧无或少有动脉粥样硬化病变的区域定义为非狭窄区域)进行评估。然后将以下 4 种不同方法与方法 A 进行比较:方法 B,角度校正 45°;方法 C,角度校正 60°,沿血管壁测量;方法 D,角度校正 60°,非狭窄区域为收缩速度峰值最低区域;方法 E,角度校正 60°,参考点固定在目标病变区域近端 2 厘米处。采用 Bland-Altman 方法分析 PSVR 值的差异:结果:方法 A 测得的平均 PSVR 值为 2.27±0.51,方法 B、C、D 和 E 测得的平均 PSVR 值分别为 2.21±0.55、2.31±0.66、2.34±0.63 和 2.11±0.63。与 A 方法相比,B 方法 PSVR 测量值差异的 95% 预测区间为-0.64 至 +0.53,C 方法为-0.59 至 +0.68,D 方法为-0.77 至 +0.91,E 方法为-1.12 至 +0.79:结论:不同测量方法的 PSVR 值差异很大。DUS的PSVR值在很大程度上取决于测量方法,这可能会严重影响对LEAD的判断:临床影响:由于几种 DUS 测量方法的差异,PSVR 结果可能会发生变化。因此,需要进一步研究和统一测量方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
203
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Endovascular Therapy (formerly the Journal of Endovascular Surgery) was established in 1994 as a forum for all physicians, scientists, and allied healthcare professionals who are engaged or interested in peripheral endovascular techniques and technology. An official publication of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists (ISEVS), the Journal of Endovascular Therapy publishes peer-reviewed articles of interest to clinicians and researchers in the field of peripheral endovascular interventions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信