The clinical utility of carotid duplex scanning

We retrospectively compared the results of duplex scanning (DS) with contrast angiography (CAN) in the evaluation of 119 patients whose 238 carotid arteries were evaluated by both methods within a four-week period. The results of all patients were then categorized by two different definitions of severity of stenosis. Category A classified 1-29% stenosis as mild, 30-69% stenosis as moderate, and 70-99% diameter reduction as severe stenosis. Category B defined mild stenosis as 1-19% lumen diameter reduction, moderate as 20-49% stenosis, and severe as 50-99% stenosis. The findings by each classification were compared in 60 patients with hemispheric symptoms and in 59 patients with nonspecific symptoms. CAN was our "gold standard", and exhibited greater sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and predictive values than DS. Carotid arteries with 70% stenosis were identified by DS with greater specificity, accuracy, and predictive values than were arteries with 50% stenoses. Only the sensitivity was comparable in categorizations A and B (80% and 83%). All parameters of measurement were superior in patients with hemispheric symptoms. DS alone cannot substitute for CAN in selecting patients for carotid endarterectomy because its error rate exceeded acceptable rates of complications for carotid artery surgery. The false positive rate of DS was 4%. DS failed to diagnose 7 of 19 carotid artery occlusions, 9 of 11 ulcerated plaques, 7 of 119 instances of aortic arch disease, and 13 cases of severe intracranial artery stenosis.