¿Es necesaria la biopsia de la arteria temporal para el diagnóstico de arteritis de la temporal? / Is temporal artery biopsy necessary for the diagnosis of temporal arteritis?

El eco-Doppler color (ED) se ha empleado en el diagnóstico de la arteritis de la temporal (AT), describiendo un halo hipoecoico perivascular (HHP). El objetivo de este estudio es valorar la utilidad del ED en el diagnóstico de AT. Material y método: Estudio prospectivo en 32 pacientes con sospecha de AT. Se realizó ED evaluando la presencia de HHP. Posteriormente se practicó biopsia de arteria temporal, analizando la presencia de células gigantes multinucleadas. Se compararon los resultados obtenidos, valorando sensibilidad, especificidad, valor predictivo positivo (VPP) y valor predictivo negativo (VPN).Resultados: La presentación clínica fue: 40,6% (13) cefalea, 12,5% (4) clínica visual, 21,9%(7) dolor de la arteria temporal, 9,4% (3) AIT, 15,6% (5) polimialgia, 9,4% (3) claudicación mandibular, y 87,5% (28) elevación de VSG. Se visualizó HHP en el ED en 6 casos (18,8%). El resultado anatomopatológico de AT fue positivo en 3 casos (9,4%). Al comparar los resultados se obtiene una sensibilidad, especificidad, VPP y VPN del 66, 86, 33 y 96%, respectivamente. Conclusión: El ED es una prueba útil en el diagnóstico de AT, dejando la biopsia de la arteria temporal para casos seleccionados (AU)

Duplex ultrasound (DU) has been used in the diagnosis of temporal arteritis (TA), showing a hypoechoic perivascular halo (HPH). The aim of this study is to assess the usefulness of DU in the diagnosis of TA. Materials and method: A prospective study was conducted on 32 patients with suspected TA. DU was performed to detect the presence of HPH. A temporal artery biopsy was subsequently to analyse the presence of multinucleated giant cells. The results were compared by evaluating sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Results: The clinical presentation was: 40.6% (13) headache, 12.5% (4) visual clinical signs,21.9% (7) temporal artery pain, 9.4% (3) TIA, 15.6% (5) polymyalgia, 9.4% (3) jaw claudication, and 87.5% (28) elevated ESR.HPH was visualized in the DU in 6 cases (18.8%). The pathology of TA was positive in 3 patients (9.4%). On analysing the results, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV was 66%, 86%, 33%, and 96%, respectively. Conclusion: DU is a useful screening test in diagnosis of TA, leaving temporal artery biopsy for selected cases (AU)

¿Es útil el eco-Doppler portátil en el diagnóstico de enfermedad arterial periférica? Estudio de validación / Usefulness of a portable duplex scanning device in the diagnosis of peripheral arterial disease. A validation study

Objetivos: Validar el eco-Doppler portátil (EDP) para el diagnóstico de enfermedad arterial periférica (EAP) y analizar la influencia del tipo de lesión arterial en el resultado. Material y método: Estudio prospectivo: 60 extremidades (45 pacientes), edad media 68 años, 33 hombres/12 mujeres, 30% diabéticos, 37% dislipémicos, 58% hipertensos, 27% cardiópatas. Realizamos un EDP siguiendo las guías de diagnóstico vascular no invasivo del sector femoropoplíteo (8 segmentos), comparándolo con la arteriografía. Clasificamos como estenosis < 50%, > 50% y trombosis. Calculamos sensibilidad (S), especificidad (E), VPP, VPN e índice de acuerdo kappa. Las lesiones arteriales se clasifican en únicas o múltiples y se comparan con el grado de acierto del EDP (test chi cuadrado). Resultados: En el sector supragenicular el índice de acuerdo es bueno para diagnóstico de trombosis (K=0,779, S=86%, E=95%, VPP=79%, VPN=96%) y de estenosis > 50% (K=0,651, S=82%, E=85%, VPP=70% y VPN=92%).En el sector infragenicular el grado de acuerdo es bueno para diagnóstico de trombosis (K=0,610, S=72%, E=87%, VPP=77%, VPN 84%), pero moderado en estenosis > 50% (K=0,472, S=68%, E=78%, VPP=70% y VPN=76%).El EDP identifica correctamente 94% de trombosis en lesiones únicas frente 85% en estenosis múltiples (p=0,008) y 86% de estenosis > 50% en lesiones únicas frente 79% en múltiples (p=0,070). Conclusiones: La sensibilidad, especificidad, VPP y VPN del EDP son buenos en diagnóstico de EAP siendo más sensible para diagnóstico de trombosis que estenosis.- El EDP ofrece mayor fiabilidad en diagnóstico de EAP en sector supragenicular frente al infragenicular.- Las lesiones arteriales múltiples disminuyen la fiabilidad del EDP en el diagnóstico de trombosis(AU)

Objectives: The aim of this study is investigate the agreement between a portable duplex scanner (PDS and angiography in the diagnosis of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and analyse the influence of the type of lesion on the result. Material and methods: A prospective study was conducted on 60 limbs (45 patients) with a mean age of 68 years, 33 males/12 females, 30% diabetes mellitus, 37% dyslipidaemias, 58% arterial hypertension, and 27% heart diseases. A PDS was made following the guidelines for the non-invasive diagnosis of femoral-popliteal sector (8 segments) and comparing it with the angiography. The stenosis were classified as <50%, and thrombosis as >50%. The sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), Positive Predictive Value (PPV), Negative Predictive Value (NPV) and Kappa (K) index of agreement was calculated. The arterial lesions were classified in singles or multiples, and were compared with the level of accuracy of the PDS (chi-squared test). Results: In the above-knee segment, the level of agreement was good for the diagnosis of thrombosis (K=0.779, Sp=86%, Se=95%, PPV=79%, NPV=96%) and stenosis >50% (K=0.651, Se=82%, Se=85%, PPV=70% and NPV=92%).In the below-knee segment, the index of agreement was good for the diagnosis of thrombosis (K=0.610, Sp=72%, Se=87%, PPV=77%, PNV=84%), and moderate in stenosis >50% (K=0.472, Sp=68%, Se=78%, PPV=70% and NPV=76%).The PDS correctly identified 94% of thrombosis in single lesions compared to 85% in the multiple lesions (P=.008) and 86% in stenosis >50% in single lesions compared to 79% in multiple lesions (P=.070)(AU)

Conclusions: The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and Kappa index are good in the diagnosis of PAD, being more sensitive for the diagnosis of thrombosis than for the diagnosis of stenosis.- The was more reliable for the diagnosis of PAD in above-knee segments than below-knee segments.- Multiple arterial lesions decrease the reliability of PDS in the diagnosis of thrombosis(AU)