C Roedel

Kantonsspital Frauenfeld, Frauenfeld, Thurgau, Switzerland

Are you C Roedel?

Claim your profile

Publications (5)11.81 Total impact

  • S Ernst, C Roedel, B Frauchiger
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Embolic events of the carotid bifurcatin are a rare cause of cerebrovascular accidents. We observed two patients who showed a spontaneous recanalisation of an embolic occlusion of the extracranial vessels when treated with conservative procedure using heparin. Both patients had a near complete remission of the symptoms without impairment in their daily activities.
    VASA.: Zeitschrift für Gefässkrankheiten. Journal for vascular diseases 03/2003; 32(1):51-3. · 1.01 Impact Factor
  • S. Ernst, C. Roedel, B. Frauchiger
    Vasa-european Journal of Vascular Medicine. 01/2003; 032(01):0051-0053.
  • C. Roedel, B. Frauchiger
    Vasa-european Journal of Vascular Medicine. 01/2003; 032(04):0250-0250.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and Purpose-The intima-media thickness (IMT) of the carotid artery is a (morphological) sonographic parameter that depends on the degree of atherosclerosis. In the renal arteries, the value of the (hemodynamic) resistive index (RI) is correlated with the severity of atherosclerosis. In contrast to the well-known IMT, no study has yet applied the carotid RI to estimate generalized atherosclerosis. -The SMART atherosclerosis risk score was determined in 157 patients (94 men and 63 women; mean age 63 [range 19 to 80] years) with at least 1 vascular risk factor or a known vascular disease. Duplex sonography of the common carotid (CCA) and internal carotid artery (ICA) was then performed, with determination of IMT and RI. -The mean risk score of all patients was 8.8+/-3.5 (range 1 to 17), the mean IMT value in the CCA was 0.727+/-0.161 mm, the mean RI in CCA was 0.79+/-0.066, and the mean RI in ICA was 0.661+/-0.082. Highly significant correlations were found between the score and IMT CCA and the score and RI ICA (r=0.62, P:<0.0001 and r=0.55, P:<0.0001). The score-RI CCA correlation was much less marked (r=0.354, P:<0.0001). The intraobserver and interobserver agreement was less for IMT than for RI CCA and ICA. The areas under the curve of the receiver operating curves to distinguish between low-risk and high-risk patients resulted in values of 0.86, 0.81, and 0.69 for IMT, RI ICA, and RI CCA, respectively. -Although RI reflects the atherosclerotic process in an indirect manner, the correlation between the RI ICA and the SMART atherosclerosis score as well as the ability to distinguish between low- and high-risk patients are comparable to those of the well-known IMT.
    Stroke 04/2001; 32(4):836-41. · 6.16 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We analysed factors influencing diagnostic yield and treatment and their potential for optimising the use of carotid duplex sonography (CDS). Patients referred for CDS were divided into three groups: 1: high likelihood of carotid symptoms, 2: suspected presence of asymptomatic carotid lesions, 3: other indications. Clinical data, the grading of stenosis and the therapeutic consequences were analysed. The efficiency of diagnosis was tested with an algorithm. 344 patients were included. Groups 1, 2 and 3 contained > or = 1 pathological finding in the carotid or vertebral system in 68%, 86% and 55% respectively, whereas high-grade stenoses or occlusions of the internal carotid artery (ICA) were detected in 10.8%, 16% and 3.6% respectively. Age > 50, > 1 risk factor, carotid murmur and concomitant vascular disease were associated with a significantly higher diagnostic yield. Subsequent treatment in groups 1, 2 and 3 involved carotid thromboendarterectomy in 6.4%, 2% and 0.7% respectively and the start of treatment with a platelet aggregation inhibitor in 9%, 30% and 17% respectively. The optimisation algorithm would have saved 21% of CDS scans. Clinical pre-selection criteria determine the diagnostic yield of CDS. The potential for optimisation depends on the treatment regimen chosen for asymptomatic stenoses and secondary prophylaxis.
    Ultraschall in der Medizin 10/2000; 21(5):199-205. · 4.65 Impact Factor