Singhania Pankaj, Das Tapas Chandra, Bose Chiranjit, Mondal Asif, Bhattacharjee Rana, Singh Archana, Mukhopadhyay Satinath, Chowdhury Subhankar
Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research, Kolkata, India.
Department of Endocrinology, Medical College, Kolkata, India.
Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2024 Feb 27;16(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s13098-024-01291-2.
Non-invasive clinic-based tools for assessing PAD are not without limitations. Therefore, costly tests like Doppler study, CT angiography and MR angiography are often required to make a diagnosis. Ankle brachial index (ABI), commonly used for assessment of PAD, has high false positivity rates in sclerosed, calcified arteries which render them non-compressible. Toe brachial index (TBI) can be an alternative, as digital arteries are relatively unaffected by these changes.
To compare the reliability of ABI and TBI in diagnosing PAD in type 2 diabetes using CT angiography (CTA) as the reference.
175 adults with T2D were selected. ABI &TBI were measured with an automated vascular Doppler XT 6 ports bilaterally for all subjects. For any subject, the limb with lower ABI and TBI was included for analysis. ABI < 0.9 & TBI < 0.6 were taken as evidence of PAD. CTA showing > 50% narrowing was taken as evidence of PAD.
24% of our study subjects had CTA confirmed PAD. ABI has low sensitivity of 35.29% (95% CI 0.21-0.52) compared to TBI being 82.35% (95% CI 0.66-0.92). The specificity however was similar. ABI < 0.9 was able to detect CTA confirmed PAD, but ABI > 0.9, including the so-called normal ABI (0.9-1.3) was unable to detect PAD. ROC showed ABI at 1.005 has sensitivity 64.71% (95% CI 0.48- 0.79) and specificity 61.7% (95% CI 0.53-0.69) and TBI at 0.6 has sensitivity 82.35% (95% CI 0.66-0.92) & specificity 92% (95% CI 0.87-0.96). Utilizing Cohen's Kappa, the reliability of ABI with respect to CTA showed fair agreement (K = 0.225, p = 0.001), whereas the reliability of TBI with respect to CTA showed substantial agreement (K = 0.759, p < 0.0001).
ABI < 0.9 detects PAD reliably, but presence of PAD in patients with ABI > 9.0 including the normal of ABI (0.9-1.3) can be confirmed with TBI, which correlated strongly with CTA. TBI is also non-inferior for PAD detection, when ABI < 0.9. TBI and not ABI can be utilized for initial assessment of PAD in subjects with T2D.
用于评估外周动脉疾病(PAD)的非侵入性临床工具并非没有局限性。因此,通常需要进行如多普勒检查、CT血管造影和MR血管造影等成本高昂的检查来做出诊断。常用于评估PAD的踝臂指数(ABI)在硬化、钙化的动脉中具有较高的假阳性率,这些动脉难以被压缩。由于指动脉相对不受这些变化的影响,趾臂指数(TBI)可以作为一种替代方法。
以CT血管造影(CTA)为参考,比较ABI和TBI在诊断2型糖尿病患者PAD中的可靠性。
选取175例成年2型糖尿病患者。对所有受试者双侧使用自动血管多普勒XT 6通道测量ABI和TBI。对于任何受试者,纳入ABI和TBI较低的肢体进行分析。ABI<0.9且TBI<0.6被视为PAD的证据。CTA显示狭窄>50%被视为PAD的证据。
我们研究中的24%受试者CTA确诊为PAD。与TBI的82.35%(95%CI 0.66 - 0.92)相比,ABI的敏感性较低,为35.29%(95%CI 0.21 - 0.52)。然而,特异性相似。ABI<0.9能够检测出CTA确诊的PAD,但ABI>0.9,包括所谓的正常ABI(0.9 - 1.3)则无法检测出PAD。ROC曲线显示,ABI为1.005时,敏感性为64.71%(95%CI 0.48 - 0.79),特异性为61.7%(95%CI 0.53 - 0.69);TBI为0.6时,敏感性为82.35%(95%CI 0.66 - 0.92),特异性为92%(95%CI 0.87 - 0.96)。利用科恩kappa系数,ABI相对于CTA的可靠性显示出中等一致性(K = 0.225,p = 0.001),而TBI相对于CTA的可靠性显示出高度一致性(K = 0.759,p<0.0001)。
ABI<0.9能可靠地检测出PAD,但对于ABI>9.0包括正常ABI(0.9 - 1.3)的患者,其PAD的存在可以通过TBI来确认,TBI与CTA密切相关。当ABI<0.9时,TBI在PAD检测方面也不逊色。对于2型糖尿病患者,可利用TBI而非ABI进行PAD的初步评估。