Comparison between vascular Doppler ultrasound and contrast exams in chronic peripheral arterial disease.

Abstract

Vascular Doppler ultrasound (DUS) has evolved over recent years because of improvements in the technology involved in the acquisition and processing of sound and image data. The method is an excellent option for use in diagnosis of peripheral arterial disease considering its availability, low cost, and absence of harmful effects. The breakdown of logistics supply chains caused by the COVID-19 pandemic caused worldwide shortages of iodinated contrast, highlighting the need to validate alternative diagnostic methods. To use DUS for decision-making when choosing between by-pass and endovascular surgery for femoropopliteal arterial disease and compare the results to those of iodinated contrast exams. We compared DUS with examinations using contrast for identification of stenoses/occlusions and indication of surgical treatment (by-pass vs. endovascular). In the first phase of the study the results were merely compared, DUS vs. angiotomography. Then, in the second phase, the vascular ultrasound results were used for screening between by-pass and endovascular treatment, comparing DUS with angiotomography in cases scheduled for by-pass and with arteriography in endovascular patients. In phase 1, the sensitivity of DUS compared to CT angiography was 100% for the SFA territory. When considering solely the choice of bypass vs. endovascular treatment, the results showed 100% agreement for phase 1 and 94% for phase 2. Notwithstanding the sample size, the study fulfilled its objective of demonstrating the reliability of DUS for indicating the treatment choice between by-pass and endovascular surgery.