Skip Navigation

QJM 2007 100(12):785-789; doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcm103
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Alberts, M.S.
Right arrow Articles by Mosen, D.M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Alberts, M.S.
Right arrow Articles by Mosen, D.M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Association of Physicians. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Diagnosing temporal arteritis: duplex vs. biopsy

M.S. Alberts and D.M. Mosen

From Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Vancouver, USA

Address correspondence to Dr M.S. Alberts, Vancouver Medical Office, 2211 East Mill Plain Blvd, Vancouver, Washington 98661, USA. email: michael.s.alberts{at}kp.org

Received 4 May 2007 and in revised form 6 August 2007


   Abstract

Background: Temporal artery biopsy is the traditionally-accepted method of diagnosing temporal arteritis, but is of limited sensitivity.

Aim: To compare the clinical decisions made after negative temporal artery biopsy vs. negative temporal artery duplex, and the effects on patient outcomes.

Design: Retrospective analysis.

Methods: Of 290 patients suspected of having temporal arteritis, 147 underwent bilateral temporal artery duplex with a negative result, and 143 underwent unilateral temporal artery biopsy with a negative result. These groups were compared. Dependent measures included the proportion of patients in each group whose steroids were discontinued by their primary care doctor after either negative test, and the difference in the number of alternative diagnoses considered after a negative test. The incidence of blindness in each group was also compared, as a measure of adverse outcomes. Patients were then stratified by pre-test probability of having the disease, and compared using the same measures.

Results: Equivalent proportions of patients in the two groups had steroids discontinued after a negative test result, even when further stratified into risk groups by the probability of having temporal arteritis. No differences in adverse outcomes or number of alternative diagnoses considered were noted between groups.

Discussion: In clinical practice, bilateral temporal artery duplex served the same function as biopsy, but without subjecting patients to the potential morbidity of a surgical procedure. Temporal artery biopsy could be reserved only for situations where the duplex result is inconsistent with the clinical picture, and the biopsy result, if different from the duplex result, might influence the treatment decision.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.