Key result
Clinical assessment was the best predictor of aortoiliac stenosis >50% (R2=0.40), while adding vascular laboratory tests like PVR and Laplace waveform analysis improved detection of less severe disease.
Why the study?
Does the addition of vascular laboratory tests to clinical assessment improve the diagnostic accuracy of aortoiliac stenosis compared to arteriography?
Population
116 arteriopaths (221 lower limbs) and normal control subjects (146 limbs)
Comparison
Vascular laboratory tests and clinical assessment vs Biprojectional arteriograms (reference standard)
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
May support clinical assessment for >50% aortoiliac stenosis with adjunctive tests for milder disease; leaves open prospective validation.
Cross-Sectional
Does the addition of vascular laboratory tests to clinical assessment improve the diagnostic accuracy of aortoiliac stenosis compared to arteriography?
Effect estimate: R2 = 0.66
Conventional clinical assessment is optimal for detecting aortoiliac stenoses >50%, while vascular laboratory tests like PVR and Laplace waveform analysis are helpful for less severe disease.
Campbell et al. (1984) conducted a cross-sectional in Aortoiliac stenosis. Non-invasive vascular laboratory tests and clinical assessment vs. Biprojectional arteriograms was evaluated on Accuracy of prediction of aortoiliac stenosis severity (R2 = 0.66). Clinical assessment was the best predictor of aortoiliac stenosis >50% (R2=0.40), while adding vascular laboratory tests like PVR and Laplace waveform analysis improved detection of less severe disease.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: