Multicenter validation study of real-time ultrasonography, arteriography, and pathology: pathologic evaluation of carotid endarterectomy specimens.

Abstract

The morphologic description and measurements of endarterectomy specimens are usually believed to be accurate and are used as the gold standard against which the findings of diagnostic procedures are judged. Pathology data on 289 endarterectomy specimens from five participating centers and the corresponding angiography and B-mode ultrasonography data provided a basis for scrutinizing the validity of using the morphologic measurements as a standard. Discrepancies of greater than 1 mm between pathology and angiography measurements of minimum residual lumen occurred in 35% of the cases and between pathology and B-mode ultrasonography measurements in 64% of the cases. Discrepancies of greater than 1 mm between pathology- and angiography-measured lesion width occurred in 81% of the cases and between pathology and B-mode ultrasonography measurements in 64% of the cases. The cases representing mismatches of greater than 1 mm at one participating center were subjected to a rigorous review, with remeasurement of all morphologic features, in an attempt to explain the discrepancies. Various types of artifactual distortion of the specimens, the presence of slit-like and occluded lumens that were likely related to loss of perfusion pressure, and an inability to match planes of interrogation used in angiography and B-mode ultrasonography with pathology planes contributed significantly to the existence of mismatches. On the other hand, fixation and decalcification produced minimal and insignificant distortional changes. We conclude that the acquisition of quantitative data from endarterectomy specimens and the acceptance of morphologic data as a standard are limited by a number of problems that can be defined but have been difficult to resolve.