Why the study?
No multicenter, large-sample studies had evaluated superb microvascular imaging (SMI) for characterizing carotid intraplaque neovascularization (IPN), and the efficacy of SMI in detecting carotid IPN remained inconclusive.
Does superb microvascular imaging (SMI) accurately detect carotid intraplaque neovascularization compared to contrast-enhanced carotid ultrasonography (CEUS) or pathology in patients with carotid stenosis?
Does superb microvascular imaging (SMI) accurately detect carotid intraplaque neovascularization compared to contrast-enhanced carotid ultrasonography (CEUS) or pathology in patients with carotid stenosis?
Superb microvascular imaging (SMI) shows excellent agreement with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and pathology for detecting carotid intraplaque neovascularization, which is associated with a history of stroke or TIA.
SMI may enable non-contrast IPN detection in carotid stenosis; leaves open validation against outcomes before clinical adoption.
OBJECTIVES: Although superb microvascular imaging (SMI) (Toshiba/Canon, Tokyo, Japan) has enabled routine characterization of intraplaque neovascularization (IPN) features in patients with carotid stenosis, no reports have been published on the multicenter and large sample size research in this aspect. The efficacy of SMI in detecting carotid IPN has not been concluded. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of SMI comparing with contrast-enhanced carotid ultrasonography (CEUS) in the detection of carotid IPN or pathologic evaluations of IPN correlated with a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). METHODS: Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched up to August 2020 to identify peer-reviewed human studies on the diagnostic accuracy of SMI in detecting IPN. For the selected study, the correlation coefficient R and Kappa index between SMI and CEUS in detecting IPN were calculated. The correlation coefficient R between SMI in identifying IPN and pathologic evaluations of IPN and the odds ratio of IPN detected by SMI and history of stroke or TIA were also extracted. The subgroup analysis was performed to indicate the source of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Our search identified 11 reports enrolling a total of 605 carotid stenosis patients. Carotid IPN detected by SMI was significantly correlated with which detected by CEUS (R, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-0.94; P = .00, and Kappa index, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67-0.80; P = .00). Notably, a significant correlation was observed in SMI in detecting IPN and pathologic evaluations of IPN (R, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.40-0.62; P = .00). The odds ratio of IPN detected by SMI and history of stroke or TIA was pooled summary with statistical significance (OR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.78-6.23; P = .00). In subgroup analysis, lower heterogeneity was associated with the degree of carotid stenosis, patients from which country, and types of equipment. CONCLUSIONS: SMI and CEUS display an excellent agreement in detecting carotid IPN. IPN detected by SMI shows high consistency with pathologic evaluations of IPN. Individuals with carotid IPN are more likely to develop stroke or TIA than those without carotid IPN.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Song et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: