Search

Objective: We determined whether site of care explains a previously identified racial disparity in carotid artery imaging., Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, data were obtained from a chart review of veterans hospitalized with ischemic stroke at 127 Veterans Administration hospitals in 2007. Extensive exclusion criteria were applied to obtain a sample who should have received carotid artery imaging. Minority-serving hospitals were defined as the top 10% of hospitals ranked by the proportion of stroke patients who were black. Population level multivariate logistic regression models with adjustment for correlation of patients in hospitals were used to calculate predictive probabilities of carotid artery imaging by race and minority-service hospital status. Bootstrapping was used to obtain 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: The sample consisted of 1,534 white patients and 628 black patients. Nearly 40% of all black patients were admitted to 1 of 13 minority-serving hospitals. No racial disparity in receipt of carotid artery imaging was detected within nonminority serving hospitals. However, the predicted probability of receiving carotid artery imaging for white patients at nonminority-serving hospitals (89.7%, 95% CI [87.3%, 92.1%]) was significantly higher than both white patients (78.0% [68.3%, 87.8%] and black patients (70.5% [59.3%, 81.6%]) at minority-serving hospitals., Conclusions: Underuse of carotid artery imaging occurred most often among patients hospitalized at minority-serving hospitals. Further work is required to explore why site of care is a mechanism for racial disparities in this clinically important diagnostic test.

Objective and Background: Spinal arteriovenous fistula (SAVF) is a rare but treatable cause of myelopathy. The diagnostic accuracy of MRI for detecting SAVF is unknown. Our objective was to determine the sensitivity and specificity of MRI in the diagnosis SAVF and characterize its radiographic features., Methods: We conducted a retrospective case-control study of all SAVF treated at our institution from 1995 to 2010, including patients who presented with myelopathy, had MRIs available for review, and underwent either spinal angiogram or had another diagnosis confirming test. Two blinded board-certified radiologists reviewed a series of MRIs and listed the most likely diagnoses, radiologic findings, and recommended follow-up. Sensitivities and specificities of MRI compared to spinal angiogram were calculated. We additionally conducted a literature review of cases describing MRI findings in spinal dural and perimedullary arteriovenous fistula., Results: We identified 36 cases of SAVF (median age 56, 67% male) and 32 controls (median age 54, 44% male). MRI was sensitive in identifying SAVF as the primary diagnosis in 94% (radiologist A, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-1.02) and 89% (radiologist B, 95% CI 0.79-0.99) of cases. The sensitivity of spinal cord T2 hyperintensity or flow voids was 100% and the specificity of T2 hyperintensity and flow voids was 97%., Conclusions: Among patients with myelopathy, spinal angiography is mandatory in the presence of both T2 hyperintensity and flow voids but may be unnecessary if both of these findings are absent.

Background: Transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) can identify intracranial atherosclerosis but have not been rigorously validated against the gold standard, catheter angiography. The WASID trial (Warfarin Aspirin Symptomatic Intracranial Disease) required performance of angiography to verify the presence of intracranial stenosis, allowing for prospective evaluation of TCD and MRA. The aims of Stroke Outcomes and Neuroimaging of Intracranial Atherosclerosis (SONIA) trial were to define abnormalities on TCD/MRA to see how well they identify 50 to 99% intracranial stenosis of large proximal arteries on catheter angiography., Study Design: SONIA standardized the performance and interpretation of TCD, MRA, and angiography. Study-wide cutpoints defining positive TCD/MRA were used. Hard copy TCD/MRA were centrally read, blind to the results of angiography., Results: SONIA enrolled 407 patients at 46 sites in the United States. For prospectively tested noninvasive test cutpoints, positive predictive values (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs) were TCD, PPV 36% (95% CI: 27 to 46); NPV, 86% (95% CI: 81 to 89); MRA, PPV 59% (95% CI: 54 to 65); NPV, 91% (95% CI: 89 to 93). For cutpoints modified to maximize PPV, they were TCD, PPV 50% (95% CI: 36 to 64), NPV 85% (95% CI: 81 to 88); MRA PPV 66% (95% CI: 58 to 73), NPV 87% (95% CI: 85 to 89). For each test, a characteristic performance curve showing how the predictive values vary with a changing test cutpoint was obtained., Conclusions: Both transcranial Doppler ultrasound and magnetic resonance angiography noninvasively identify 50 to 99% intracranial large vessel stenoses with substantial negative predictive value. The Stroke Outcomes and Neuroimaging of Intracranial Atherosclerosis trial methods allow transcranial Doppler ultrasound and magnetic resonance angiography to reliably exclude the presence of intracranial stenosis. Abnormal findings on transcranial Doppler ultrasound or magnetic resonance angiography require a confirmatory test such as angiography to reliably identify stenosis.

Objective: To compare contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CEMRA) with intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for evaluating carotid stenosis., Methods: A total of 167 consecutive symptomatic patients, scheduled for DSA following screening duplex ultrasound (DUS), were prospectively recruited to have CEMRA. Three independent readers reported on each examination in a blinded and random manner. Agreement was assessed using the Bland-Altman method. Diagnostic and potential clinical impact of CEMRA was evaluated, singly and in combination with DUS., Results: CEMRA tended to overestimate stenosis by a mean bias ranging from 2.4 to 3.8%. A significant part of the disagreement between CEMRA and DSA was directly caused by interobserver variability. For detection of severe stenosis, CEMRA alone had a sensitivity of 93.0% and specificity of 80.6%, with a diagnostic misclassification rate of 15.0% (n = 30). More importantly, clinical decision-making would, however, have been potentially altered only in 6.0% of cases (n = 12). The combination of concordant DUS and CEMRA reduced diagnostic misclassification rate to 10.1% (n = 19) at the expense of 47 (24.9%) discordant cases needing to proceed to DSA. An intermediate approach of selective DUS review resulted in a marginally worse diagnostic misclassification rate of 11.6% (n = 22) but with only 6.8% of discordant cases (n = 13)., Conclusions: DSA remains the gold standard for carotid imaging. The clinical misclassification rate with CEMRA, however, is acceptably low to support its safe use instead of DSA. The appropriateness of combination strategies depends on institutional choice and cost-effectiveness issues.