2018
Ankle-brachial index in diabetic patients - which upper cut-off value is to be used?
HOMZA, M., O. MACHACZKA, M. PORZER, Milan KOZÁK, J. PLASEK et. al.Základní údaje
Originální název
Ankle-brachial index in diabetic patients - which upper cut-off value is to be used?
Autoři
HOMZA, M. (203 Česká republika, garant), O. MACHACZKA (203 Česká republika), M. PORZER (203 Česká republika), Milan KOZÁK (203 Česká republika, domácí), J. PLASEK (203 Česká republika) a D. SIPULA (203 Česká republika)
Vydání
Bratislava Medical Journal - Bratislavské lekárske listy, BRATISLAVA, Univerzita Komenského, 2018, 0006-9248
Další údaje
Jazyk
angličtina
Typ výsledku
Článek v odborném periodiku
Obor
30201 Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems
Stát vydavatele
Slovensko
Utajení
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Impakt faktor
Impact factor: 0.859
Kód RIV
RIV/00216224:14110/18:00106275
Organizační jednotka
Lékařská fakulta
UT WoS
000457047700011
Klíčová slova anglicky
ankle-brachial index; diabetes; peripheral arterial disease; lower extremity arterial disease; cut-off
Příznaky
Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno
Změněno: 21. 2. 2019 13:21, Soňa Böhmová
Anotace
V originále
OBJECTIVES: In diabetic patients, there is a discrepancy in guidelines for ankle-brachial index (ABI) screening for peripheral arterial disease (PAD). While diabetes organizations suggest the value of upper limit of normal ABI to be 1.3, cardiologists recommend 1.4. Also, guidelines recommend using the higher value of ankle pressure (HAP) but multiple recent studies propose the opposite (LAP). METHODS: In this prospective study, we performed ABI measurements in 62 diabetic patients. Results were calculated by comparing higher and lower values of ankle pressure to those of duplex ultrasound (stenosis >= 50 % was considered PAD). Special attention was paid to patients with high and non-measurable ABI. RESULTS: LAP ABI appears to be a preferable method for PAD screening in diabetics. The upper cut-off value of 1.4 yielded better results with sensitivity of 93 % and negative predictive value of 91 %. No limbs with ABI between 1.3 and 1.4 with signifi cant stenosis were found. However, using HAP for the upper cut-off captured additional PAD patients. PAD was abundant among patients with high or non-measurable ABI. CONCLUSIONS: LAP should be used for assessing low ABI (cut-off 0.9) while HAP for detecting the abnormally high ABI. The preferable high ABI cut-off is 1.4. Condition with abnormally high or non-measurable ABI should be considered as PAD (Tab. 3, Ref. 22). Text in PDF www. elis. sk.