Key result
Portable ultrasonography detects carotid calcifications with ~41% sensitivity vs. CBCT, missing most sub-2-mm lesions.
Why the study?
The sensitivity of portable ultrasound probes to detect carotid artery calcification compared to CBCT results was not well established.
Does portable ultrasonography accurately detect carotid artery calcifications compared to CBCT in adult patients?
Cross-Sectional (n=60)
No
Does portable ultrasonography accurately detect carotid artery calcifications compared to CBCT in adult patients?
Effect estimate: 41.3% sensitivity (95% CI 30.9-52.6)
Portable ultrasonography is highly sensitive for detecting carotid artery calcifications ≥2 mm but lacks adequate sensitivity for identifying smaller lesions compared to CBCT.
Portable ultrasound should not yet alter CBCT-based screening; leaves open its selective role for lesions ≥2 mm in validation studies.
Carotid artery calcification is an important predictor of atherosclerosis that associated with an increased risk of stroke and can be detected through panoramic radiography, Doppler ultrasound, or cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging modality. This study aimed to assess the sensitivity of a portable ultrasound probe in detecting carotid artery calcification compared to CBCT results. This cross-sectional diagnostic study was conducted on 60 patients(> 30 years old) who were referred to the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology at Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran. Individuals with calcifications identified on CBCT and subsequently examined portable ultrasonography. All imaging were evaluated independently for the right and left carotid arteries and were performed using NNT (NewTom) and ultrasonography through Clarius L15HD3 probe software. The images were evaluated by specialists in oral and maxillofacial radiology and cardiology, and the data were analyzed using SPSS version 27, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Carotid artery calcification lesions increased significantly with age ( p < 0.05). Although lesions were more frequent in females, the difference was not statistically significant. Also, unilateral carotid artery involvement was more common than bilateral involvement, with no significant difference between the right and left sides. The lesions were predominantly solitary, and the distribution of morphological patterns differed considerably between the two genders ( p < 0.05). Portable ultrasonography performed better in detecting lesions ≥ 2 mm. CBCT is useful for the incidental detection of carotid artery calcifications. Portable ultrasonography can identify larger lesions but is not sufficiently sensitive for smaller calcifications. In this study, ultrasonography detected only 4.3% of lesions smaller than 2 mm, while it identified all lesions measuring 2–4 mm and larger than 4 mm (100% sensitivity), with an overall sensitivity of 41%. Therefore, incidental detection of carotid artery calcifications on CBCT may warrant appropriate referral for further clinical and vascular evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Asaadi et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Carotid artery calcification (n=60). Portable ultrasonography vs. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was evaluated on Sensitivity for detecting carotid artery calcifications (41.3% sensitivity, 95% CI 30.9-52.6). Portable ultrasonography demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 41.3% for detecting carotid artery calcifications identified on CBCT, identifying all lesions ≥2 mm but missing most smaller ones.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: