Compares ultrasound and MRI accuracy for diagnosing giant cell arteritis, highlighting cardiovascular risk implications.
For the total population T1fs-BB-MRI outperformed ultrasound due to its higher specificity. For patients without high to very high CVR, both modalities perform comparably. In patients with high to very high CVR, MRI has better diagnostic accuracy. Different IMT-cut-offs and liberal use of confirmatory tests seem justified for patients with high CVR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Seitz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: