This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (3)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Vladimir Hachinski, MD, FRCPC, DScMed

Arch Neurol. 1995;52(8):834.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

BARNETT AND colleagues state that ultrasound "as an initial screening examination has no competitor."¹ Strandness² agrees. The contributors assume that the examinations will be carried out in well-equipped laboratories, where the instruments will be calibrated and the staff properly trained and supervised. However, reality is far from this ideal. The poor correlation found between angiography and ultrasonography in the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET)³ shows that even in good centers the accuracy of ultrasound is not high compared with angiography unless special and expensive efforts are made to calibrate and standardize the measurements, as was done in the recent study completed by The Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study Group.⁴

The fact remains that all the major studies demonstrating benefit from carotid endarterectomy are based on cerebral angiography and that the correlation between ultrasound and arteriography, as practiced rather than as preached, is poor. Angiography is . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?