Abstract ID: 26-325

Diagnostic Utility of Temporal Artery Biopsy and Ultrasound in Suspected Giant Cell Arteritis: A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study

Author: Mina Ibrahimi
Base Hospital / Institution: The Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust

Presentation Type: ePoster Presentation

Purpose

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is a sight-threatening vasculitis requiring rapid diagnosis and treatment. Temporal artery biopsy (TAB) has traditionally been the gold standard for diagnosis, with ultrasound (US) emerging as a non-invasive alternative, however real-world performance remains uncertain. This study evaluates the utility of TAB, US, and clinical features in diagnosing GCA, with a focus on identifying practice-changing insights.


Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of 41 patients who underwent both TAB and US for suspected GCA over 10 years at a single centre. A final clinical diagnosis of GCA was the reference standard. Data collected included age, systemic and ocular symptoms, visual acuity and colour vision, outcomes of TAB/US, C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) levels. We calculated diagnostic accuracy metrics and performed univariate logistic regression to identify clinical predictors for GCA.


Results

21 of 41 patients (51.2%) were clinically diagnosed as GCA. TAB demonstrated a sensitivity of 38.1% and specificity of 100%, while US sensitivity was 19.0% and specificity 100%. Combined testing improved sensitivity to 47.6%. Notably, 52.4% with diagnosed GCA had negative results on both tests representing a substantial false negative burden. Agreement between modalities was limited (κ = 0.23). Longer steroid exposure prior to biopsy was associated with reduced TAB positivity. Increasing age and elevated CRP and ESR were significant predictors of GCA.


Conclusion

In our cohort, TAB/US showed excellent specificity but substantially lower sensitivity than landmark studies. Over half of clinically diagnosed GCA cases were missed on TAB/US despite combined testing, and poor agreement suggests each test may detect different disease phenotypes. In real world practice, TAB and US are therefore useful rule-in tests but lack sufficient sensitivity to exclude GCA. These results challenge reliance on investigative pathways alone and support a shift towards clinically-driven, multimodal diagnostic strategies to avoid treatment delay in high-risk patients.


Additional Authors

First name Last name Base Hospital / Institution
Nicole Quah Whipps Cross Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust
Prachi Shah Moorfields Eye Hospital
Ian Subak-Sharpe Whipps Cross Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust

↑ Back to top