Annals
Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians
:
Advanced search
 
box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
Articles in PubMed by Author:
  arrow  Merrell, S. W.
space
  arrow  Talbot, S. R.
space
 arrow  Related Articles in PubMed
space
 arrow  PubMed Citation
space
 arrow  PubMed
space

LETTER

Color Doppler Ultrasound and Deep Venous Thrombosis

right arrow Steven W. Merrell; Clynn R. Ford; and Steven R. Talbot

1 June 1993 | Volume 118 Issue 11 | Pages 906-907


TO THE EDITOR:

Our vascular laboratory provided diagnostic data for the RD Heparin study and we have concerns about the design of Davidson and colleagues' study [1] comparing color Doppler ultrasound to contrast venography for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis (DVT).

The data were collected from only 7 of the 20 centers in the RD Heparin study. They were retrospectively selected on the basis of a questionnaire, in which each center declared whether they used color Doppler ultrasound for the diagnosis of DVT. In our laboratory, all study patients were examined with color Doppler ultrasound equipment, but our data were arbitrarily excluded because we do not use the color image as a criterion for diagnosis of DVT. We rely primarily on confluent examination of venous segments with real-time B-mode imaging and compression maneuvers.

The authors submitted data from our laboratory for another study [2]. In this study, duplex scanning had a sensitivity of 100% in detecting four cases of proximal DVT and had an overall accuracy of 86% for evaluation of calf or thigh veins when compared with venography. However, if duplex scanning had been declared the gold standard, venography would have had an accuracy of only 87% because it missed six cases of DVT of the calf and one of DVT of the thigh. These results are much better than those reported in the Annals article and would not support the conclusion by Davidson and colleagues that duplex scanning is insensitive and "should not be substituted for venography".

Any multicenter study using ultrasound should be designed to ensure that examinations are done in a consistent fashion with comparable equipment; this was not done in the current study. In addition, it is well known that patients with perioperative hip and knee arthroplasty are among the most technically difficult patient groups to examine by duplex scanning, further contributing to the poor results reported for color Doppler ultrasound.

The above concerns notwithstanding, we actually agree with the conclusion that color Doppler imaging is an inferior method for diagnosing DVT. Unfortunately, most Annals readers do not have adequate background knowledge to realize that properly performed duplex scanning remains the test of choice for diagnosis of DVT in most patients. Color Doppler is useful for anatomic orientation and for enhancing the speed of examination but it should not be relied on to provide the diagnosis of DVT.


References
space
up arrowTop
dotReferences

1. Davidson BL, Elliott CG, Lensing AW, for the RD Heparin Arthroplasty Group. Low accuracy of color Doppler ultrasound in the detection of proximal leg vein thrombosis in asymptomatic high-risk patients. Ann Intern Med. 1992; 117:735-8.

2. Elliott CG, Suchyta M, Rose SL, Talbot S, Ford C, Raskob G, et al. Duplex ultrasonography for the detection of deep vein thrombi after total hip or knee arthroplasty. Angiology. 1993; 44:26-33.

About Letters
space

The Editors welcome submissions for possible publication in the Letters section. Authors of letters should:

•Include no more than 300 words of text, three authors, and five references

•Type with double-spacing

•Send three copies of the letter, an authors' form signed by all authors, and a cover letter describing any conflicts of interest related to the contents of the letter.

Letters commenting on an Annals article will be considered if they are received within 6 weeks of the time the article was published. Only some of the letters received can be published. Published letters are edited and may be shortened; tables and figures are included only selectively. Authors will be notified that the letter has been received. If the letter is selected for publication, the author will be notified about 3 weeks before the publication date. Unpublished letters cannot be returned.

Annals welcomes electronically submitted letters.





box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
Articles in PubMed by Author:
  arrow  Merrell, S. W.
space
  arrow  Talbot, S. R.
space
 arrow  Related Articles in PubMed
space
 arrow  PubMed Citation
space
 arrow  PubMed
space


 Home | Current Issue | Past Issues | In the Clinic | ACP Journal Club | CME | Collections | Audio/Video | Mobile | Subscribe | Tools | Help | ACP Online