A randomized cross-over trial in patients suspected of PAD on diagnostic accuracy of ankle-brachial index by Doppler-based versus four-point oscillometry based measurements

Abstract

Summary. Background: For diagnosis of peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAD), a Doppler-based ankle-brachial-index (dABI) is recommended as the first non-invasive measurement. Due to limitations of dABI, oscillometry might be used as an alternative. The aim of our study was to investigate whether a semi-automatic, four-point oscillometric device provides comparable diagnostic accuracy. Furthermore, time requirements and patient preferences were evaluated. Patients and methods: 286 patients were recruited for the study; 140 without and 146 with PAD. The Doppler-based (dABI) and oscillometric (oABI and pulse wave index – PWI) measurements were performed on the same day in a randomized cross-over design. Specificity and sensitivity against verified PAD diagnosis were computed and compared by McNemar tests. ROC analyses were performed and areas under the curve were compared by non-parametric methods. Results: oABI had significantly lower sensitivity (65.8%, 95% CI: 59.2%–71.9%) compared to dABI (87.3%, CI: 81.9–91.3%) but significantly higher specificity (79.7%, 74.7–83.9% vs. 67.0%, 61.3–72.2%). PWI had a comparable sensitivity to dABI. The combination of oABI and PWI had the highest sensitivity (88.8%, 85.7–91.4%). ROC analysis revealed that PWI had the largest area under the curve, but no significant differences between oABI and dABI were observed. Time requirement for oABI was significantly shorter by about 5 min and significantly more patients would prefer oABI for future testing. Conclusions: Semi-automatic oABI measurements using the AngER-device provide comparable diagnostic results to the conventional Doppler method while PWI performed best. The time saved by oscillometry could be important, especially in high volume centers and epidemiologic studies.