Intima-media thickness cut-off values depicting “halo sign” and potential confounder analysis for the best diagnosis of large vessel giant cell arteritis by ultrasonography

Abstract

BackgroundVascular ultrasound enables fast-track diagnosis of giant cell arteritis (GCA), but this method remains subjective. We aimed to determine intima-media thickness (IMT) cut-off values for large vessel GCA (LV-GCA) and identify the clinically relevant factors influencing it.MethodsWe included 214 patients referred for ultrasound evaluation within a fast-track clinic due to suspected GCA. IMT was measured in axillary, brachial, subclavian, superficial femoral, and common carotid arteries (CCA), in a place without identifiable atherosclerotic plaques. IMT cut-off values for vasculitis were determined by comparing measurements in arteries classified as vasculitis vs. controls without GCA/polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR).ResultsGiant cell arteritis was diagnosed in 81 individuals, including extracranial LV-GCA in 43 individuals. Isolated PMR was diagnosed in 50 subjects. In 83 remaining patients, another diagnosis was confirmed, and they served as controls. The rounded optimal IMT cut-off values for the diagnosis of axillary vasculitis were 0.8 mm, subclavian-0.7 mm, superficial femoral-0.9 mm, CCA-0.7 mm, and brachial-0.5 mm. The IMT cut-off values providing 100% specificity for vasculitis (although with reduced sensitivity) were obtained with axillary IMT 1.06 mm, subclavian-1.35 mm, superficial femoral-1.55 mm, CCA-1.27 mm, and brachial-0.96 mm. Axillary and subclavian arteritis provided the best AUC for the diagnosis of GCA, while carotid and axillary were most commonly involved (24 and 23 patients, respectively). The presence of calcified atherosclerotic plaques was related to an increase of IMT in both patients and controls, while male sex, age ≥ 68, hypertension, and smoking increased IMT in controls but not in patients with GCA.ConclusionCut-off values for LV-GCA performed best in axillary and subclavian arteritis but expanding examination to the other arteries may add to the sensitivity of GCA diagnosis (another location, e.g., brachial arteritis) and its specificity (identification of calcified atherosclerotic plaques in other arteries such as CCA, which may suggest applying higher IMT cut-off values). We proposed a more linear approach to cut-off values with two values: one for the most accurate and the other for a highly specific diagnosis and also considering some cardiovascular risk factors.