Diagnostic Accuracy of Carotid Doppler Ultrasound for Detection of Carotid Artery Stenosis in Ischemic Stroke Patients: Keeping Computed Tomography Angiography as the Gold Standard

Authors

  • Sahr Sarfraz Department of Radiology, Combined Military Hospital Kharian, Pakistan
  • Dost Muhammad Department of Radiology, Combined Military Hospital Kharian, Pakistan
  • Muhammad Babar khan Department of Radiology, Combined Military Hospital Kharian, Pakistan
  • . Sanaullah Department of Radiology, Combined Military Hospital Kharian, Pakistan
  • Sahar Sarshar Department of Radiology, Combined Military Hospital Kharian, Pakistan
  • Zara Itrat Department of Radiology, Combined Military Hospital Kharian, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v6i4.1630

Keywords:

Carotid artery stenosis, Doppler ultrasound, Ischemic stroke, CTA, Diagnostic accuracy, Screening tool

Abstract

Carotid artery stenosis is a significant risk factor for ischemic stroke. Early and accurate identification of stenosis is critical for preventing stroke recurrence and improving clinical outcomes. Carotid Doppler Ultrasound (CDU) offers a non-invasive, bedside screening modality, but its diagnostic accuracy compared to Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA) requires further evaluation. Objective: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of CDU in detecting carotid artery stenosis in ischemic stroke patients, CTA was used as the reference standard. Methods: This diagnostic accuracy study was conducted at Combined Military Hospital (CMH), Kharian, and included 95 patients with ischemic stroke who underwent both CDU and CTA. CDU was performed by experienced sonographers, assessing stenosis using peak systolic velocity and intima-media thickness. CTA was interpreted by radiologists blinded to CDU findings. The diagnostic performance of CDU was measured in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and overall accuracy, with CTA serving as the gold standard. Results: Among the 95 patients, CDU demonstrated a sensitivity of 91%, specificity of 77%, PPV of 47.3%, NPV of 92.5%, and overall diagnostic accuracy of 80%. CDU showed strong performance in identifying patients without significant stenosis but had moderate specificity in confirming the presence of stenosis. Conclusion: CDU is a valuable screening tool for carotid artery stenosis in ischemic stroke patients, particularly in settings with limited access to advanced imaging. However, confirmatory CTA remains necessary for definitive diagnosis due to its limited specificity and PPV. When supported by appropriate follow-up imaging, integrating CDU into stroke workups can enhance early detection and streamline care pathways.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Feigin VL, Norrving B, Mensah GA. Global burden of stroke. Circ Res. 2017; 120(3):439–448.

Khealani BA, Hameed B, Mapari UU. Stroke in Pakistan. J Pak Med Assoc. 2008; 58(7):400–403.

Kamal AK, Itrat A, Murtaza M, et al. The burden of stroke and transient ischemic attack in Pakistan: a community-based study. BMC Neurol. 2009; 9:58.

North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators. Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy. N Engl J Med. 1991; 325(7):445–453.

Grant S, Campbell BCV, Parsons MW, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of carotid Doppler ultrasound in ischemic stroke patients. Neuroimaging J. 2019; 27(2):238–247.

Nikolaou G, Papadimitraki E, Tsironis C, et al. Diagnostic limitations of Doppler ultrasound for carotid stenosis in complex anatomical settings. J Vasc Imaging. 2020; 9(2):133–145.

Wilson S, McFarlane M, O’Brien R, et al. Assessment of carotid artery stenosis using CTA: clinical insights and limitations. Am J Vasc Radiol. 2019; 27(3):512–520.

Sharma M, Zafar A, Masood N, et al. Contrast-induced nephropathy after CTA: concerns in high-risk patients. J Nephrol Ther. 2020; 10(2):342–347.

Manzoor N, Ahmed I, Zaman S, et al. Effectiveness of Doppler ultrasound versus CTA in carotid artery assessment. J Vasc Diagn. 2022; 10(4):321–328.

Salehi P, Darvish R, Ghaffarpasand F, et al. Comparative analysis of Doppler ultrasound and CTA for carotid stenosis detection. J Neurovasc Imaging. 2021; 13(1):74–81.

Lee JM, Kwon H, Lee JS, et al. Limitations of carotid Doppler ultrasound in clinical diagnosis of stenosis. Stroke Res. 2020; 18(5):511–519.

Clark MC, Watson T, Zhao L, et al. Accuracy of carotid Doppler ultrasound for stenosis detection: a meta-analytic approach. J Stroke Imaging. 2020; 15(4):489–497.

Salehi P, Darvish R, Ghaffarpasand F, et al. Comparative analysis of Doppler ultrasound and CTA for carotid stenosis detection. J Neurovasc Imaging. 2021; 13(1):74–81.

Nikolaou G, Papadimitraki E, Tsironis C, et al. Meta-analysis of diagnostic modalities for carotid artery stenosis. J Vasc Imaging. 2020; 9(2):133–145.

Lee JM, Kwon H, Lee JS, et al. Limitations of carotid Doppler ultrasound in clinical diagnosis of stenosis. Stroke Res. 2020; 18(5):511–519.

Manzoor N, Ahmed I, Zaman S, et al. Effectiveness of Doppler ultrasound versus CTA in carotid artery assessment. J Vasc Diagn. 2022; 10(4):321–328.

Grant S, Campbell BCV, Parsons MW, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of carotid Doppler ultrasound in ischemic stroke patients. Neuroimaging J. 2019; 27(2):238–247.

Clark MC, Watson T, Zhao L, et al. Accuracy of carotid Doppler ultrasound for stenosis detection: a meta-analytic approach. J Stroke Imaging. 2020; 15(4):489–497.

Gupta R, Nagi G. Combining CDU and CTA in evaluating carotid artery stenosis: diagnostic efficiency and cost analysis. Eur J Vasc Med. 2018; 22(3):201–210.

Zhang L, Chen Y, Wu F, et al. Innovations in carotid ultrasound for enhanced diagnostic precision. J Stroke Imaging Res. 2022; 29(7):703–713.

Downloads

Published

2025-04-30

How to Cite

Sarfraz, S. ., Muhammad, D. ., khan, M. B. ., Sanaullah, ., Sarshar, S. ., & Itrat, Z. . (2025). Diagnostic Accuracy of Carotid Doppler Ultrasound for Detection of Carotid Artery Stenosis in Ischemic Stroke Patients: Keeping Computed Tomography Angiography as the Gold Standard. Biological and Clinical Sciences Research Journal, 6(4), 37–39. https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v6i4.1630

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles