Peripheral arterial disease: Therapeutic confidence of CT versus digital subtraction angiography and effects on additional imaging recommendations

Radiology

Volumn 233, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 385-391

  Adriaensen, Miraude E A P M ^a,c   Kock, Marc C J M ^a   Stijnen, Theo ^a   Van Sambeek, Marc R H M ^a   Van Urk, Hero ^a   Pattynama, Peter M T ^a   Hunink, M G Myriam ^a,b  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Arteries, peripheral; Computed tomography (CT), angiography; Digital subtraction angiography, comparative studies

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTERY DISEASE; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIGITAL SUBTRACTION ANGIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGING; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANGIOGRAPHY; ANGIOGRAPHY, DIGITAL SUBTRACTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 7044222455     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2331031595     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Dormandy JA, Rutherford RB. Management of peripheral arterial disease (PAD). TASC Working Group. TransAtlantic Inter-Society Concensus (TASC). J Vasc Surg 2000; 31(1 pt 2):S1-S296.
2. Gates J, Hartnell GG. Optimized diagnostic angiography in high-risk patients with severe peripheral vascular disease. Radio-Graphics 2000; 20:121-133.
3. Dalstra JA, Reitsma JB. Cardiovascular disease in the Netherlands. Den Haag, the Netherlands: Netherlands Heart Foundation, 1997; 30-39.
4. Dawson P, Lees WR. Multi-slice technology in computed tomography. Clin Radiol 2001; 56:302-309.
5. Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 1991; 11:88-94.
6. Hunink MG, Krestin GP. Study design for concurrent development, assessment, and implementation of new diagnostic imaging technology. Radiology 2002; 222:604-614.
7. Rieker O, Duber C, Neufang A, Pitton M, Schweden F, Thelen M. CT angiography versus intraarterial digital subtraction angiography for assessment of aortoiliac occlusive disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:1133-1138.
8. Kramer SC, Gorich J, Aschoff AJ, et al. Diagnostic value of spiral-CT angiography in comparison with digital subtraction angiography before and after peripheral vascular intervention. Angiology 1998; 49:599-606.
9. Bourlet P, De Fraissinnette B, Garcier JM, et al. Comparative assessment of helical CT-angiography, 2D TOF MR-angiography and 3D gadolinium enhanced MRA in aorto-iliac occlusive disease. J Radiol 2000; 81:1619-1625.
10. Heuschmid M, Kopp AF, Krieger A, Kuettner A, Hinrichs T, Claussen CD. Multi-slice-CT-angiography of the lower extremity in comparison to DSA: technique and first clinical results (abstr). Radiology 2001; 221(P):455.
11. Balzer JO, Seifried C, Herzog C, Thalhammer C, Pira A, Vogl TJ. Evaluation of POAD of the thigh and limb with multi-slice CT angiography (MS-CTA) (abstr). Radiology 2001; 221(P):454.
12. Catalano C, Fraioli F, Bezzi M, Laghi A, Napoli A, Pediconi F. Multi-slice spiral CT angiography in the evaluation of patients with peripheral arterial disease (abstr). Radiology 2001; 221(P):454.
13. Puls R, Knollmann F, Werk M, et al. Multi-slice spiral CT: 3D CT angiography for evaluating therapeutically relevant stenosis in peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Rontgenpraxis 2001; 54:141-147. [German]
14. Jarvik JG, Deyo RA, Koepsell TD. Screening magnetic resonance images versus plain films for low back pain: a randomized trial of effects on patient outcomes. Acad Radiol 1996; 3(suppl 1):S28-S31.
15. Thornbury JR. Eugene W. Caldwell Lecture. Clinical efficacy of diagnostic imaging: love it or leave it. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 162:1-8.
16. Sunshine JH, McNeil BJ. Rapid method for rigorous assessment of radiologic imaging technologies. Radiology 1997; 202:549-557.
17. Dixon AK, Hollingworth W. Measuring the effects of medical imaging on physicians' diagnostic and therapeutic thinking. Acad Radiol 1998; 5(suppl 2):S274-S276.
18. Dixon AK. The impact of medical imaging on the physician's diagnostic and therapeutic thinking. Eur Radiol 1998; 8:488-490.
19. Defining and measuring the "value" of diagnostic imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 6:7-9.
20. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Radiology 2003; 226:24-28.
21. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman D. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA 2001; 285:1987-1991.
22. Roland M, Torgerson DJ. What are pragmatic trials? BMJ 1998; 316:285.
23. Jarvik JG, Maravilla KR, Haynor DR, Levitz M, Deyo RA. Rapid MR imaging versus plain radiography in patients with low back pain: initial results of a randomized study. Radiology 1997; 204:447-454.
24. Blackmore CC, Black WC, Jarvik JG, Langlotz CP. A critical synopsis of the diagnostic and screening radiology outcomes literature. Acad Radiol 1999; 6(suppl 1): S8-S18.
25. Gillan MG, Gilbert FJ, Andrew JE, et al. Influence of imaging on clinical decision making in the treatment of lower back pain. Radiology 2001; 220:393-399.
26. Guyatt GH, Tugwell PX, Feeny DH, Drummond MF, Haynes RB. The role of before-after studies of therapeutic impact in the evaluation of diagnostic technologies. J Chronic Dis 1986; 39:295-304.
27. Mackenzie R, Dixon AK, Keene GS, Hollingworth W, Lomas DJ, Villar RN. Magnetic resonance imaging of the knee: assessment of effectiveness. Clin Radiol 1996; 51:245-250.
28. Maurer EJ, Kaplan PA, Dussault RG, et al. Acutely injured knee: effect of MR imaging on diagnostic and therapeutic decisions. Radiology 1997; 204:799-805.
29. Visser K, Hunink MG. Peripheral arterial disease: gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography versus color-guided duplex US - a meta-analysis. Radiology 2000; 216:67-77.
30. Eng J, Siegelman SS. Improving radiology research methods: what is being asked and who is being studied? Radiology 1997; 205:651-655.
31. Black WC. Biases in the assessment of diagnostic innovations. Acad Radiol 1998; 5(suppl 2):S280-S282.
32. Jarvik JG. Practical issues in conducting clinical trials: randomized, controlled trials of imaging studies. Acad Radiol 1998; 5(suppl 2):S266-S268.
33. Ramsay CR, Grant AM, Wallace SA, Garthwaite PH, Monk AF, Russell IT. Assessment of the learning curve in health technologies: a systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2000; 16:1095-1108.