Follow-Up of Treatment Response With Dynamic Doppler Ultrasound in Raynaud Phenomenon

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to investigate the role of flow parameters obtained with dynamic Doppler ultrasound in the objective follow-up of treatment response in patients with Raynaud phenomenon (RP). SUBJECTS AND METHODS. The study included 33 patients with newly diagnosed primary RP, 31 with secondary RP, and 26 healthy participants (control subjects). Both groups of patients with RP underwent sonography before and after treatment. The control group underwent sonography once. Baseline digital arterial diameter and flow volume were measured at room temperature. After cold provocation, diameter and flow volume were measured again, and flow starting time and flow normalizing time were recorded. Data were measured as mean (± SD) values. RESULTS. Baseline diameter did not significantly increase in either group after treatment (p > 0.05) (primary RP pretreatment, 0.79 ± 0.17 mm; posttreatment, 0.82 ± 0.19 mm; secondary RP pretreatment, 0.66 ± 0.13 mm; posttreatment, 0.68 ± 0.14 mm). Baseline flow volume increased significantly in both groups (p < 0.01) (primary RP pretreatment, 3.08 ± 2.96 mL/min; posttreatment, 3.91 ± 3.39 mL/min; secondary RP pretreatment, 2.14 ± 1.94 mL/min; posttreatment, 2.80 ± 2.15 mL/min). Cold provocation diameter increased significantly in both groups after treatment (p < 0.01) (primary RP pretreatment, 0.63 ± 0.15 mm; posttreatment, 0.70 ± 0.16 mm; secondary RP pretreatment, 0.56 ± 0.15 mm; posttreatment, 0.63 ± 0.13 mm). Cold provocation flow volume increased significantly in both groups after treatment (p < 0.01) (primary RP pretreatment, 1.18 ± 1.26 mL/min; posttreatment, 2.17 ± 2.16 mL/min; secondary RP pretreatment, 1.07 ± 1.40 mL/min; posttreatment, 1.46 ± 1.67 mL/min). After treatment, there was no statistically significant increase in flow starting time in patients with primary RP (p > 0.05), but there was a significant increase in patients with secondary RP (p < 0.05) (primary RP pretreatment, 1.15 ± 2.27 minutes; posttreatment, 0.61 ± 1.41 minutes; secondary RP pretreatment, 3.13 ± 4.81 minutes; posttreatment, 1.58 ± 2.36 minutes). After treatment, flow volume normalizing time improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.01) (primary RP pretreatment, 7.24 ± 7.60 minutes; posttreatment, 3.84 ± 3.39 minutes; secondary RP pretreatment, 9.58 ± 8.49 minutes; posttreatment, 4.32 ± 3.56 minutes). Among patients with primary RP, the posttreatment flow starting time was similar to that in the control group. Despite improvements, all remaining parameters differed in the treatment group compared with the control group. CONCLUSION. Doppler ultrasound can be used effectively to monitor RP treatment. Blood flow volume can be measured without cold provocation to facilitate follow-up care of patients with RP.