Does B-mode common carotid artery intima-media thickness differ from M-model?

Van Bortel, Luc M.; Vanmolkot, Floris H.; van der Heijden-Spek, Janneke J.; Bregu, Marsel; Staessen, Jan A.; Hoeks, Arnold P.

« Previous Next »Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
Volume 27, Issue 10 , Pages 1333-1336, October 2001

Does B-mode common carotid artery intima-media thickness differ from M-model?

Luc M. Van Bortel
- Address correspondence to: Prof. Dr. Luc Van Bortel, Heymans Institute of Pharmacology, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
- Department of Pharmacology, Maastricht University, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Heymans Institute of Pharmacology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
Floris H. Vanmolkot
- Department of Pharmacology, Maastricht University, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht, The Netherlands
Janneke J. van der Heijden-Spek
- Department of Pharmacology, Maastricht University, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht, The Netherlands
Marsel Bregu
- Department of Pharmacology, Maastricht University, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht, The Netherlands
Jan A. Staessen
- Hypertension Unit, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
Arnold P. Hoeks
- Department of Biophysics, Maastricht University, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht, The Netherlands

Received 23 April 2001; accepted 20 July 2001.

Abstract

An increased intima-media thickness of the common carotid artery is thought to be an early sign of atherosclerosis. Both B- and M-mode ultrasonographic techniques are used to measure the intima-media thickness of the common carotid artery (B-IMT and M-IMT, respectively). The present study compares intima-media thickness of the common carotid artery measured with the two techniques. Intima-media thickness was measured in a random population sample of 250 subjects. Comparison was made by mean and 95% confidence intervals of differences between B-IMT and M-IMT, by linear regression analysis, and by intraclass and concordance correlation coefficients. M-IMT was + 0.011 ± 0.091 mm (95% confidence intervals: −0.167 to + 0.188 mm) larger than B-IMT, which was 0.661 ± 0.136 mm (range: 0.380 to 1.120 mm). Intraclass and concordance correlation coefficients were 0.802 and 0.801, respectively. In conclusion, acceptable agreement exists between the two methods and there was no important systematic difference between B-IMT and M-IMT. (E-mail: luc.vanbortel@rug.ac.be)

Keywords: Intima-media thickness, B-mode, M-mode, Arterial wall, Common carotid artery, Atherosclerosis, Diagnostic imaging