This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Badri, H. Articles by Bhattacharya, V. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Badri, H. Articles by Bhattacharya, V. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Duplex Ultrasound Scanning (DUS) Versus Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA) in the Follow-Up After EVAR

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: hassan.badri{at}hotmail.co.uk.

	Abstract

Introduction: Computed tomography angiography (CTA) is the gold standard follow-up modality after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). A potential alternative noninvasive and less expensive modality is duplex ultrasound scanning (DUS).

Methods: We studied 314 follow-up paired scans (DUS and CTA) in 59 patients with EVAR.

Results: Endoleak—Endoleak was detected in 23.7% patients. The sensitivity and specificity rates of DUS were 54% and 95.3%, respectively. All 9 endoleaks that needed secondary intervention were detected on DUS. Eight of those were identified within a year after EVAR. Sac size—The mean difference in maximum diameter between the DUS and CTA was 5 mm in 84.5% of cases and 10 mm in 97.1%. Graft patency—There was 100% agreement between CTA and DUS.

Conclusions: Duplex ultrasound scanning was reliable as it detected all the leaks that needed reintervention after EVAR. Duplex ultrasound scanning showed similar results to CTA in detecting sac size and patency.

First published on October 13, 2009
Angiology 2009, doi:10.1177/0003319709348296


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?