Key result
Ultrasound yielded a correct diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis in 87.2% of patients compared to 59.6% with clinical evaluation.
Why the study?
Does ultrasound improve diagnostic accuracy compared to clinical evaluation in patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis of the leg?
Observational (n=47)
Does ultrasound improve diagnostic accuracy compared to clinical evaluation in patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis of the leg?
Absolute Event Rate: 87.2% vs 59.6%
Ultrasound is a highly accurate diagnostic tool for proximal deep vein thrombosis and is suitable as a screening procedure for symptomatic patients.
Ultrasound was associated with higher diagnostic accuracy than clinical evaluation for suspected leg DVT; leaves open confirmation of outcome impact in prospective studies.
The ultrasound method for detection of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the leg has been used in a study comprising 47 patients. This method was compared in the same group with a clinical evaluation and was controlled by venography. Clinical evaluation gave a correct diagnosis in 28 (59.6%) of 47 patients, false positive or false negative in 19 (40.4%). With the ultrasound method, the correct diagnosis was made in 41 (87.2%) of 47 patients, false positive in 3 (6.4%) and false negative in 3 (6.4%). No cases were missed of thrombosis situated proximal to the popliteal vein. The method was less accurate in cases of thrombosis situated in or distal of the popliteal vein; the 3 patients in whom a false negative diagnosis was made, belonged to this group. Since the ultrasound method has been shown to give few false positive and false negative results, it should be suitable as a screening procedure in patients with symptoms suggestive of DVT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rune Lindqvist (1977) conducted an observational in Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the leg (n=47). Ultrasound vs. Clinical evaluation was evaluated on Correct diagnosis. Ultrasound yielded a correct diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis in 87.2% of patients compared to 59.6% with clinical evaluation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: