Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2001 Jan;33(1):42-50.
doi: 10.1067/mva.2001.112215.

Follow-up evaluation of endoluminally treated abdominal aortic aneurysms with duplex ultrasonography: validation with computed tomography

Affiliations
Free article
Comparative Study

Follow-up evaluation of endoluminally treated abdominal aortic aneurysms with duplex ultrasonography: validation with computed tomography

A d'Audiffret et al. J Vasc Surg. 2001 Jan.
Free article

Abstract

Objective: A growing number of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms are currently being offered endoluminal treatment. However, the incidence of endoleaks, stenosis, and thrombosis is around 25% to 30%. As a result, a strict post procedure imaging surveillance protocol is necessary. The purpose of this study was to compare duplex ultrasonography (DU) and computed tomography (CT) for the follow-up of endoluminally treated aortic aneurysms.

Methods: A total of 89 patients were followed up with serial CT and DU at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after endoluminal treatment. Special attention was directed toward the presence of endoleaks and aneurysm diameter evolution. Preoperative CT and DU were also reviewed to assess aneurysm diameter correlation.

Results: With DU, 14 type I and 21 type II endoleaks were identified. In one case the DU did not visualize a type II endoleak present on CT, and CT did not confirm three type II leaks identified with DU. There was only one false positive for type I endoleak with DU. The sensitivity of DU was 96% with a specificity of 94%, when compared with CT. A linear regression analysis of the diameters obtained with DU and CT revealed a good correlation. However, variability was high, indicating poor agreement. Regarding diameter evolution, the range was identical in 45%, and the trend was similar in 73%. However, in 9% of the cases, DU showed a decrease in diameter, whereas CT showed a significant increase.

Conclusion: DU is an accurate tool for the diagnosis of endoleaks, but is less valuable for diameter measurements, when compared with CT. Currently, DU is a useful tool, but CT remains a key part of the postoperative evaluation after endoluminal treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. At institutions where DU is used for follow-up, researchers should perform quality control studies to avoid potentially significant errors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms