These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Limited value of temporal artery ultrasonography examinations for diagnosis of giant cell arteritis: analysis of 77 subjects.
    Author: Maldini C, Dépinay-Dhellemmes C, Tra TT, Chauveau M, Allanore Y, Gossec L, Terrasse G, Guillevin L, Coste J, Mahr A.
    Journal: J Rheumatol; 2010 Nov; 37(11):2326-30. PubMed ID: 20810501.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Use of TA-US for diagnostic investigation of giant cell arteritis (GCA) has been proposed but remains a matter of debate because of the heterogeneous findings. We retrospectively evaluated operating characteristics of temporal artery ultrasonography (TA-US) in a single teaching hospital. METHODS: All subjects with suspected GCA had been seen between 2002 and 2008 and had undergone TA-US with continuous-wave Doppler (until 2004) or color duplex ultrasonography (after 2004), followed within 30 days by a temporal artery biopsy (TAB). TA-US findings were compared with TAB-proven GCA and clinically diagnosed GCA. Results are expressed as sensitivities, specificities, and positive (LR+) and negative likelihood ratios (LR-) of stenoses, occlusions, and the halo sign; for the latter, only color duplex TA-US was considered. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients fulfilled the selection criteria; 13 had TAB-proven and 19 had clinically defined GCA. Stenoses/occlusions were seen on 45.5% of TA-US and the halo sign was seen only once (3.2%) in 31 duplex TA-US. Respective sensitivities, specificities, LR+, and LR- for GCA diagnosis (using TAB-proven/clinically defined GCA as reference standards) were 69%/53%, 59%/57%, 1.7/1.2, and 0.5/0.8 for stenoses and/or occlusions, and 17%/10%, 100%/100%, infinite/infinite, and 0.8/0.9 for the halo sign. CONCLUSION: The halo sign showed 100% specificity for GCA but only 10%-17% sensitivity. Stenoses/occlusions were of low diagnostic value. These observations suggest that TA-US is neither an effective substitute for TAB nor a reliable screening test to decide which patients can be safely spared TAB.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]