The use of ultrasound as an aid in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis: a pilot study comparing histological features with ultrasound findings

Abstract

The results presented give a sensitivity of 86%, specificity of 68%, and positive predictive value of 50% for the use of ultrasound in the diagnosis of GCA. Conclusions This preliminary study indicates that this test may be helpful in those patients with symptoms suggestive of GCA, but currently we cannot recommend any change of present practice.

Ultrasonography in Diagnosis and Follow-Up of Temporal Arteritis: An Update

“…Stenosis alone demonstrated a very low sensitivity in TA because it was commonly found even in elderly patients without TA, since they are usually affected by arteriosclerosis (Schmidt et al, 1997;Schmidt & GromnicaIhle, 2003, 2005. Conversely acute occlusions, although less frequent than stenosis, were more specific for TA being rarely found in patients without TA (Schmidt et al, 1997;Schmidt & Gromnica-Ihle, 2003, 2005 Since the first description (Schmidt et al, 1997), several studies have been published on the diagnostic value of CDUS in TA with similar results (Aschwanden et al, 2010;Bley et al, 2008;Ghinoi et al, 2008;Houtman et al, 2008;Karahaliou et al, 2006;Lesar et al, 2002;Maldini et al, 2010;Morinobu et al, 2011;Murgatroyd et al, 2003;Nesher et al, 2002;Perez Lopez et al, 2009;Pfadenhauer & Weber, 2003;Reinhard et al, 2004;Romera-Villegas et al, 2004;Salvarani et al, 2002;Schmidt, 2000;Schmidt & Gromnica-Ihle, 2003;Suelves et al, 2010). In the 2005, Karassa and coll.…”

Diagnosing Giant Cell Arteritis

“…An earlier study addressed the issue of "biopsy negative GCA" by using ultrasonography and comparing the results only with patients having positive temporal artery biopsies (28). Although the numbers were small, with only 7 patients having positive TABs, 6 were identified accurately on ultrasonography.…”

Diagnosis and Treatment of Giant Cell Arteritis (Temporal Arteritis) – Past, Current and Future Aspects

“…However, a bilateral "halo-sign" appears almost pathognomonic of GCA (193). In another report, Arida and coworkers (195) conducted an extensive metaanalysis of ultrasonograophy which disclosed a sensitivity of 68% and a specificity of 91% for the unilateral "halo-sign", as well as 43% and 100%, respectively for the bilateral "halo-sign" for GCA diagnosis. The reasons for apparent discrepancies regarding sensitivity of ultrasound to detect the halo to diagnose GCA may have several explanations.…”