Carotid artery stenosis: grayscale and Doppler ultrasound diagnosis--Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference.

Department of Radiology, University of Southern California (USC), Keck School of Medicine, USC University Hospital, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
Ultrasound Quarterly (Impact Factor: 1.4). 12/2003; 19(4):190-8. DOI: 10.1097/00013644-200312000-00005
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts in the field of vascular ultrasonography (US) to come to a consensus regarding Doppler US for assistance in the diagnosis of carotid artery stenosis. The panel's consensus statement is believed to represent a reasonable position on the basis of analysis of available literature and panelists' experience. Key elements of the statement include the following: First, all internal carotid artery (ICA) examinations should be performed with grayscale, color Doppler, and spectral Doppler US. Second, the degree of stenosis determined at grayscale and Doppler US should be stratified into the categories of normal (no stenosis), less than 50% stenosis, 50 to 69% stenosis, > or =70% stenosis to near occlusion, near occlusion, and total occlusion. Third, ICA peak systolic velocity (PSV) and the presence of plaque on grayscale and/or color Doppler images are primarily used in the diagnosis and grading of ICA stenosis. Two additional parameters (the ICA-to-common carotid artery PSV ratio and ICA end diastolic velocity) may also be used when clinical or technical factors raise concern that ICA PSV may not be representative of the extent of disease. Fourth, ICA should be diagnosed as normal when ICA PSV is less than 125 cm/second and no plaque or intimal thickening is visible, less than 50% stenosis when ICA PSV is less than 125 cm/second and plaque or intimal thickening is visible, 50 to 69% stenosis when ICA PSV is 125 to 230 cm/second and plaque is visible, > or =70% stenosis to near occlusion when ICA PSV is more than 230 cm/second and visible plaque and lumen narrowing are seen, near occlusion when there is a markedly narrowed lumen on color Doppler US, and total occlusion when there is no detectable patent lumen on grayscale US and no flow on spectral, power, and color Doppler US. Fifth, the final report should discuss velocity measurements and grayscale and color Doppler findings. Study limitations should be noted when they exist. The conclusion should state an estimated degree of ICA stenosis as reflected in these categories. The panel also considered various technical aspects of carotid US and methods for quality assessment, and identified several important unanswered questions meriting future research.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this prospective study was to analyze the utility of a gray-scale median (GSM) system for identifying unstable plaques and to design and validate a prediction model for unstable plaques in symptomatic atheromatous carotid arteries. Fifty-two patients with non-cardioembolic cerebral infarction were included in the study. The receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed 76% sensitivity and 82% specificity for a GSM of 29 (p < 0.001) as a cutoff point for unstable plaques. A logistic regression model indicated that a GSM <29, male gender and not having been treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were independently associated with an unstable plaque classification. A probability model for unstable plaques was achieved by combining the strength of each variable (high blood pressure, hypercholesterolemia, smoking, previous stroke, anti-hypertensive drugs, calcium channel blockers, intima–media thickness). The model was tested with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis (p < 0.001) and validated by the leave-one-out cross-validation method (p < 0.001). The prediction model based on a GSM <29, male gender and not having been treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors resulted in a probable unstable plaque assessment.
    Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 09/2014; 40(9). DOI:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2014.04.015 · 2.10 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite a decline during the recent decades in stroke-related death, the incidence of stroke has remained unchanged or slightly increased, and extracranial carotid artery stenosis is implicated in 20%-30% of all strokes. Medical therapy and risk factor modification are first-line therapies for all patients with carotid occlusive disease. Evidence for the treatment of patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis greater than 70% with either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is compelling, and several trials have demonstrated a benefit to carotid revascularization in the symptomatic patient population. Asymptomatic carotid stenosis is more controversial, with the largest trials only demonstrating a 1% per year risk stroke reduction with CEA. Although there are sufficient data to advocate for aggressive medical therapy as the primary mode of treatment for asymptomatic carotid stenosis, there are also data to suggest that certain patient populations will benefit from a stroke risk reduction with carotid revascularization. In the United States, consensus and practice guidelines dictate that CEA is reasonable in patients with high-grade asymptomatic stenosis, a reasonable life expectancy, and perioperative risk of less than 3%. Regarding CAS versus CEA, the best-available evidence demonstrates no difference between the two procedures in early perioperative stroke, myocardial infarction, or death, and no difference in 4-year ipsilateral stroke risk. However, because of the higher perioperative risks of stroke in patients undergoing CAS, particularly in symptomatic, female, or elderly patients, it is difficult to recommend CAS over CEA except in populations with prohibitive cardiac risk, previous carotid surgery, or prior neck radiation. Current treatment paradigms are based on identifying the magnitude of perioperative risk in patient subsets and on using predictive factors to stratify patients with high-risk asymptomatic stenosis.
    Vascular Health and Risk Management 07/2014; 10:403-416. DOI:10.2147/VHRM.S48923
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Galectin-3, a member of galectines, a family of β-galactoside-specific lectins, has been reported to propagate vascular inflammation. The role of galectin-3 in carotid atherosclerosis is controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship of galectin-3 with plaque vulnerability in patients with high grade carotid stenosis. This was a cross sectional study of patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Carotid plaques obtained from 78 consecutive patients (40 symptomatic [SG], 38 asymptomatic [AG]) undergoing CEA were histologically analyzed for galectin-3, macrophages (CD68) and laminin. Pre-operatively the biochemical profile and plaque echogenicity (gray-scale median, GSM) score were determined. There were no significant differences in clinical and demographic parameters between SG and AG (p > .05). The SG had a lower GSM score (44.21 ± 18.24 vs. 68.79 ± 28.79, p < .001) and a smaller positive stained area for galectin-3 (4.89 ± 1.60% vs. 12.01 ± 5.91%, p < .001) and laminin (0.88 ± 0.71% vs. 3.46 ± 2.12%, p < .001) than the AG. On the other hand, intra-plaque macrophage content was increased in SG (p < .001). For the whole cohort, symptomatic status was independently associated with intra-plaque contents of both galectin-3 (OR = 0.634, p < .001), and GSM score (OR = 0.750, p < .001). Notably, patients on long term statin treatment had elevated galectin-3 and lowered macrophage intra-plaque concentrations compared with those on short term treatment (p < .05). A low galectin-3 intra-plaque concentration seems to correlate with clinically and ultrasonically defined unstable human carotid plaques. Long term statin treatment may induce increase of intra-plaque galectin-3 concentration mediating plaque stabilization. Copyright © 2014 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery 11/2014; 49(1). DOI:10.1016/j.ejvs.2014.10.009 · 3.07 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 3, 2014