Comparison of Power Doppler with Colour Duplex ... - Iua2012.org
Comparison of Power Doppler with Colour Duplex ... - Iua2012.org
Comparison of Power Doppler with Colour Duplex ... - Iua2012.org
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Pankaj K Jha; Mohsen Chabok; Richard Parker & M Aslam<br />
Imperial College, London, UK<br />
&<br />
Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK
• Lower limb arterial disease (PAD) is due to<br />
Atherosclerosis producing stenosis /occlusion.<br />
• Treatment requires accurate assessment <strong>of</strong> the anatomical<br />
location and degree <strong>of</strong> disease in the arterial tree.<br />
• Digital subtraction Angiography (DSA) is the gold<br />
standard investigation but <strong>Colour</strong> flow <strong>Duplex</strong> imaging<br />
(CDI) is usual first line modality.<br />
• <strong>Power</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong> Ultrasound (PDUS) is based on<br />
measurement <strong>of</strong> amplitudes <strong>of</strong> reflected doppler echoes<br />
and is clinically used in Carotid imaging.
• <strong>Duplex</strong> Ultrasound has been claimed to be as good as<br />
arteriography.<br />
‣ Karacagil S, L<strong>of</strong>burg AM, Granbo A, Lorelius LE, Bergqvist D. Value <strong>of</strong> duplex scanning in evaluation <strong>of</strong> crural and foot arteries in limbs<br />
<strong>with</strong> severe lower limb ischemia – a prospective comparison <strong>with</strong> angiography. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1996; 12:300-3<br />
‣ Sensier Y, Hartshorne T, Thrush A, Nydahl S, Bolia A, London NJM. A prospective comparison <strong>of</strong> lower limb duplex scanning and<br />
arteriography. Euro J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1996; 11: 170-5<br />
‣ Sensier Y, Fishwick G, Owen R, Pemberton M, Bell PRF, London NJM. A comparison between colour duplex ultrasonography and<br />
arteriography for imaging infra popliteal arterial lesions. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1998; 15: 44-50<br />
‣ Collins R, Burch J, Cranny G, Aguiar-Ibáñez R, Craig D, Wright K, Berry E, Gough M, Kleijnen J, Westwood M. <strong>Duplex</strong> ultrasonography,<br />
magnetic resonance angiography, and computed tomography angiography for diagnosis and assessment <strong>of</strong> symptomatic, lower limb<br />
peripheral arterial disease: systematic review. BMJ 2007;334:1257 doi:10.1136/bmj.39217.473275.55<br />
‣ Wilson YG, George JK, Wilkins DC, Ashley S. <strong>Duplex</strong> assessment <strong>of</strong> run<strong>of</strong>f before femorocrural reconstruction. Br J Surg 1997; 84: 1360-3.<br />
• <strong>Colour</strong> <strong>Duplex</strong> Ultrasound has limitations:<br />
• Time consuming & operator dependent<br />
• Difficulty in penetrating calcified walls<br />
• Difficult to detect low post stenotic flow<br />
• Aliasing also introduces errors in velocity measurements<br />
Reduced sensitivity and specificity for crural arteries<br />
‣ Allard L, Cloutier G, Durrand LG et al. Limitations <strong>of</strong> ultrasonic duplex scanning for diagnosing lower limb arterial stenosis in the<br />
presence <strong>of</strong> adjacent segment disease. J Vasc Surg 1994; 19: 650-7.<br />
‣ Polak JF. Carotid ultrasound. Radiol Clin N Am 2001; 39: 569–89.<br />
‣ Horrow MM, Stassi J, Shurman A, Brody J, Kirby CL, Rosenberg HL. The limitations <strong>of</strong> carotid sonography: interpretive and technologyrelated<br />
errors. AJR 2000;174:189–94.
• <strong>Power</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong> Ultrasound (PDUS) produces intravascular<br />
colour images generated from measurement <strong>of</strong> amplitude <strong>of</strong><br />
the reflected doppler echoes.<br />
– It is therefore independent <strong>of</strong>:<br />
‣ Angle <strong>of</strong> insonation – No aliasing<br />
‣ Velocity & Direction <strong>of</strong> blood flow<br />
– It is dependent on:<br />
‣ Density <strong>of</strong> blood cells in the lumen<br />
• Increased sensitivity for displaying the continuity <strong>of</strong> vessels.<br />
‣ Weskott H-P. Amplitude <strong>Doppler</strong> US: slow blood flow detection level tested <strong>with</strong> a flow phantom. Radiology 1997; 202: 125–30.<br />
‣ Keberle M, Jenett M, Beissert M, Jahns R, Haerten R, Hahn D. Three dimensional power <strong>Doppler</strong> sonography in screening for carotid<br />
artery disease. J Clin Ultrasound 2000;28:441–51.<br />
‣ Rubin JM, Bude RO, Carson PL, Bree RL, Adler RS. <strong>Power</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong> US: a potentially useful alternative to mean frequency-based color<br />
doppler US. Radiology. 1994;190:853-856.<br />
‣ Jung EM, Clevert DA, Rupp N. B-flow and color-coded B-flow in sonographic diagnosis <strong>of</strong> filiform stenosis <strong>of</strong> the internal carotid<br />
artery. Fortschr Rontgenstr 2003; 175: 1251–8.
• Use <strong>of</strong> <strong>Power</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong> in lower limb vascular<br />
assessment is limited<br />
‣ Guo Z, Fenster A. Three-dimensional power <strong>Doppler</strong> imaging: A phantom study to quantify vessel stenosis. Ultrasound Med Biol<br />
1996; 22: 1059 –1069.<br />
‣ Cloutier G , Qin Z, Garcia D, Soulez G, Olivia V, Durand LG. Assessment <strong>of</strong> Arterial stenosis in a flow model <strong>with</strong> power <strong>Doppler</strong><br />
angiography: Accuracy and Observations on blood echogenicity. Ultrasound in Med. & Biol., 2000; 26; 9: 1489–1501.<br />
• Difficulties in using <strong>Power</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong>:<br />
– Susceptible to motion artefact<br />
– Cannot detect direction <strong>of</strong> flow<br />
– Reduced Depth penetration<br />
– Sometimes difficult to distinguish artery from vein<br />
‣ Rubin JM, Adler RS. <strong>Power</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong> expands standard color capability. Diagn Imaging. December 1993:66-69.<br />
‣ Hamper UM, DeJong MR, Caskey CI, Sheth S. <strong>Power</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong> imaging: clinical experience and correlation <strong>with</strong> color <strong>Doppler</strong> US<br />
and other imaging modalities. Radiographics. 1997;17:499-513
• To prospectively compare the accuracy <strong>of</strong> <strong>Power</strong><br />
<strong>Doppler</strong> Ultrasound (PDUS) <strong>with</strong> <strong>Colour</strong> flow<br />
<strong>Duplex</strong> Imaging (CDI) and Digital subtraction<br />
Angiography (DSA) in the assessment <strong>of</strong> Popliteal<br />
and Infra-Popliteal segments <strong>of</strong> the lower limb<br />
arterial tree.
• Eligibility: patients referred for Fontaine class II – IV PVD<br />
• Patients would undergo routine <strong>Colour</strong> flow assessment.<br />
• <strong>Power</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong> would then be used to assess Popliteal<br />
artery and beyond.<br />
• If indicated patients would then be assessed by DSA<br />
• Arteries divided in these segments for comparison:<br />
• Above Knee Popliteal • Proximal Peroneal<br />
• Below Knee Popliteal • Mid Peroneal<br />
• Tibio-Peroneal Trunk • Lower Peroneal<br />
• Proximal Posterior Tibial<br />
• Proximal Anterior Tibial • Mid Posterior Tibial<br />
• Mid Anterior Tibial • Distal Posterior Tibial<br />
• Distal Anterior Tibial • Dorsalis Pedis
Scanning Protocol based on: Abigail Thrush & Timothy Hartshorne, “Peripheral<br />
Vascular Ultrasound How, Why and When”. 2ed Elsevier Churchill Livingstone.<br />
• <strong>Colour</strong> Flow <strong>Duplex</strong> Imaging:<br />
• Sequential longitudinal and Cross sectional views<br />
• Velocity measurements to give PSV ratio at stenosis (V s /V p )<br />
• Length <strong>of</strong> stenosis / occlusion & overall continuity <strong>of</strong> segment<br />
• <strong>Power</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong> Ultrasound:<br />
• Sequential longitudinal and Cross sectional views<br />
• Luminal diameter measurements (NASCET)<br />
• Length <strong>of</strong> stenosis / occlusion & overall continuity <strong>of</strong> segment<br />
• DSA:<br />
• Reported by Consultant Radiologists <strong>of</strong> min 5 years standing<br />
• Stenosis measurements according to angiographic protocols
• Statistics:<br />
• Sample size calculation: A sample size <strong>of</strong> 38 pairs will have<br />
90% power to detect a difference in proportions <strong>of</strong> 0.30 and<br />
the method <strong>of</strong> analysis is a McNemar's test <strong>of</strong> equality <strong>of</strong><br />
paired proportions <strong>with</strong> a 5% significance level (two-sided).<br />
• nQuery® version 4.0 s<strong>of</strong>tware was used to calculate the sample size.<br />
• McNemar’s test was the main test to compare the two<br />
ultrasound measurements.<br />
• All results were recorded on Micros<strong>of</strong>t Excel spread sheets and<br />
statistical calculations were carried out using SPSS/PASW s<strong>of</strong>tware<br />
version 18: SPSS/PASW for Windows, Rel. 18.0.3. 2010. Chicago: SPSS<br />
Inc
Demographics: 38 limbs from 20 patients<br />
Characteristics<br />
Results<br />
Age Range (Mean ± Std Dev) 54 – 85 (70.1 ± 9.16) years<br />
Males (%) 16 (80)<br />
Resting ABPI (mean ± Std Dev) 0.66 ± 0.24<br />
Rutherford Stage <strong>of</strong> Disease<br />
Number <strong>of</strong> limbs (%)<br />
Grade 0<br />
Grade 1<br />
Grade 2<br />
Grade 3<br />
Grade 4<br />
Grade 5<br />
2 (5.3%)<br />
8 (21.1%)<br />
1 (2.6%)<br />
15 (39.5%)<br />
11 (28.9%)<br />
1 (2.6%)<br />
Risk Factors (%)<br />
Smoking 18 (90%)<br />
Diabetes Mellitus 15 (75%)<br />
Hypertension 20 (100%)<br />
Hyperlipidaemia 18 (90%)<br />
Ischaemic Heart Disease 14 (70%)<br />
Renal Failure (CKD stage)<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
7 (35%)<br />
8 (40%)<br />
5 (25%)<br />
0 (0%)<br />
0 (0%)
<strong>Comparison</strong> <strong>of</strong> images from the 2 modalities:<br />
BK Popliteal Artery<br />
Mid Posterior Tibial Artery
CDUS y-axis<br />
McNemar’s test p-value:<br />
PDUS x-axis<br />
AK P 0.004<br />
AK P BK P TP<br />
T<br />
PAT MAT DAT DPA PPA MPA LP<br />
A<br />
PPT MPT DPT<br />
BK P 0.0005<br />
TPT 0.07<br />
PAT 0.02<br />
MAT 0.02<br />
DAT 0.003<br />
DPA 0.007<br />
PPA 0.0005<br />
MPA
• PDUS had increased sensitivity for distal vessel disease<br />
• CDUS tended to over estimate stenosis in distal vessels<br />
• Results agreed <strong>with</strong> published reports on flow<br />
phantom studies and Carotid artery assessment<br />
studies<br />
• Potential errors and difficulties:<br />
• Small study <strong>with</strong> selected patients<br />
• Different operators measured the stenosis by the 3 modalities<br />
• Heavy calcifications produced inferior images<br />
• <strong>Colour</strong> blooming
• This study concludes that in patients <strong>with</strong> severe peripheral<br />
vascular disease <strong>Power</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong> Ultrasound provides better<br />
correlation <strong>with</strong> Digital Subtraction Angiogram findings <strong>of</strong><br />
stenosis or occlusions than a <strong>Colour</strong> <strong>Doppler</strong> Ultrasound in the<br />
Popliteal and Infra-Popliteal arteries.<br />
• Its use may be more suited to the difficult distal vessels if<br />
accurate localisation <strong>of</strong> arterial stenosis is necessary.