Key result
3D ultrasound demonstrates excellent agreement with 2D ultrasound and angiography for evaluating carotid disease.
Why the study?
Studies assessing 3D ultrasound for carotid disease evaluation reported varying observer views on its reliability compared with 2D ultrasound or angiography, with ratings ranging from poor to excellent.
Does 3D ultrasound provide reliable and reproducible evaluation of carotid disease compared to 2D ultrasound and angiography?
Meta-Analysis (n=918)
Does 3D ultrasound provide reliable and reproducible evaluation of carotid disease compared to 2D ultrasound and angiography?
3D ultrasound is a highly reproducible and reliable imaging modality for evaluating carotid disease, demonstrating excellent agreement with both 2D ultrasound and angiography.
Supports 3D ultrasound adoption for carotid assessment; confirms high reproducibility across pooled studies.
AIM: Studies assessing the use of 3D ultrasound (3DUS) for the evaluation of carotid disease reported varying views among observers about its reliability vis-à-vis 2DUS or angiography; ratings provided ranged from poor to excellent. Thisstudy aims to systematically review and analyze the reliability of 3DUS for the evaluation of carotid disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PubMed database was searched for studies that evaluated carotid disease (i.e. plaque measurements and characteristics and degree of stenosis) using 3DUS. RESULTS: Sixteen studies comprising a total of 918 stenosed carotids were reviewed and meta-analyzed. Data on intra- and inter-observer reproducibility and inter-method agreement (i.e. 3DUS vs 2D and 3DUS vs angiography) were analyzed. Overall analysis showed excellent intra- and inter-observer reproducibility (intraobserver: correlation coefficient r=0.88, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.84-0.92; intra-observer: r=0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95). The analysis also showed excellent agreement between 3DUS and 2DUS (r=0.89, 95% CI 0.83-0.95) and between 3DUS and angiography (r=0.73, 95% CI 0.44-0.1). CONCLUSION: 3DUS has excellent intra- and inter-observer reproducibility and excellent agreement with 2DUS and angiography for the evaluation of carotid disease. Further studies assessing the reliability ofcarotid plaque characteristics using 3DUS in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients are required.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sultan et al. (2023) conducted a meta-analysis in Carotid disease (n=918). 3D ultrasound vs. 2D ultrasound and angiography was evaluated on Inter-method agreement between 3D ultrasound and 2D ultrasound (r=0.89, 95% CI 0.83-0.95). 3D ultrasound demonstrated excellent agreement with 2D ultrasound (r=0.89) and angiography (r=0.73) for the evaluation of carotid disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: