Cross-sectional area for the calculation of carotid artery stenosis on computed tomographic angiography

Quantifying Carotid Stenosis: History, Current Applications, Limitations, and Potential: How Imaging Is Changing the Scenario

Carotid artery stenosis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. The journey to understanding carotid disease has developed over time and radiology has a pivotal role in diagnosis, risk stratification and therapeutic management. This paper reviews the history of diagnostic imaging in carotid disease, its evolution towards its current applications in the clinical and research fields, and the potential of new technologies to aid clinicians in identifying the disease and tailoring medical and surgical treatment.

Diagnosis and treatment of Watershed strokes: a narrative review

Watershed strokes have been described previously as ischemic strokes located in vulnerable border zones between brain tissue supplied by the anterior, posterior, and middle cerebral arteries in the distal junction between two non-anastomotic arterial territories. Ischemic strokes in border zones are well-recognized entities and well-described in terms of imaging features, but the pathophysiological mechanism of brain injury production is not fully defined. Border zone ischemia is caused by cerebral hypoperfusion through decreased cerebral blood flow and arterial embolism in unstable atheroma plaque. It is often difficult to say which mechanisms are fully responsible for producing cerebral ischemic lesions. This review aimed to highlight the imaging aspect of watershed strokes and to correlate the clinical characteristics of this type of stroke with the diagnostic algorithm for optimal therapeutic management. Neurologists should promptly recognize this type of stroke and investigate its etiology in the shortest possible time.

Duplex ultrasound for diagnosing symptomatic carotid stenosis in the extracranial segments

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenosis is an important cause of stroke and transient ischemic attack. Correctly and rapidly identifying patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis is essential for adequate treatment with early cerebral revascularization. Doubts about the diagnostic value regarding the accuracy of duplex ultrasound (DUS) and the possibility of using DUS as the single diagnostic test before carotid revascularization are still debated.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the accuracy of DUS in individuals with symptomatic carotid stenosis verified by either digital subtraction angiography (DSA), computed tomography angiography (CTA), or magnetic resonance angiography (MRA).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CRDTAS, CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), ISI Web of Science, HTA, DARE, and LILACS up to 15 February 2021. We handsearched the reference lists of all included studies and other relevant publications and contacted experts in the field to identify additional studies or unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies assessing DUS accuracy against an acceptable reference standard (DSA, MRA, or CTA) in symptomatic patients. We considered the classification of carotid stenosis with DUS defined with validated duplex velocity criteria, and the NASCET criteria for carotid stenosis measures on DSA, MRA, and CTA. We excluded studies that included < 70% of symptomatic patients; the time between the index test and the reference standard was longer than four weeks or not described, or that presented no objective criteria to estimate carotid stenosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review authors independently screened articles, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and applicability concerns using the QUADAS-2 domain list. We extracted data with an effort to complete a 2 × 2 table (true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives) for each of the different categories of carotid stenosis and reference standards. We produced forest plots and summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) plots to summarize the data. Where meta-analysis was possible, we used a bivariate meta-analysis model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 25,087 unique studies, of which 22 were deemed eligible for inclusion (4957 carotid arteries). The risk of bias varied considerably across the studies, and studies were generally of moderate to low quality. We narratively described the results without meta-analysis in seven studies in which the criteria used to determine stenosis were too different from the duplex velocity criteria proposed in our protocol or studies that provided insufficient data to complete a 2 × 2 table for at least in one category of stenosis. Nine studies (2770 carotid arteries) presented DUS versus DSA results for 70% to 99% carotid artery stenosis, and two (685 carotid arteries) presented results from DUS versus CTA in this category. Seven studies presented results for occlusion with DSA as the reference standard and three with CTA as the reference standard. Five studies compared DUS versus DSA for 50% to 99% carotid artery stenosis. Only one study presented results from 50% to 69% carotid artery stenosis. For DUS versus DSA, for < 50% carotid artery stenosis, the summary sensitivity was 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48 to 0.76) and the summary specificity was 0.99 (95% CI 0.96 to 0.99); for the 50% to 69% range, only one study was included and meta-analysis not performed; for the 50% to 99% range, the summary sensitivity was 0.97 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.98) and the summary specificity was 0.70 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.73); for the 70% to 99% range, the summary sensitivity was 0.85 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.91) and the summary specificity was 0.98 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.90); for occlusion, the summary sensitivity was 0.91 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.97) and the summary specificity was 0.95 (95% CI 0.76 to 0.99). For sensitivity analyses, excluding studies in which participants were selected based on the presence of occlusion on DUS had an impact on specificity: 0.98 (95% CI 0.97 to 0.99). For DUS versus CTA, we found two studies in the range of 70% to 99%; the sensitivity varied from 0.57 to 0.94 and the specificity varied from 0.87 to 0.98. For occlusion, the summary sensitivity was 0.95 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.99) and the summary specificity was 0.91 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.99). For DUS versus MRA, there was one study with results for 50% to 99% carotid artery stenosis, with a sensitivity of 0.88 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.98) and specificity of 0.60 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.95); in the 70% to 99% range, two studies were included, with sensitivity that varied from 0.54 to 0.99 and specificity that varied from 0.78 to 0.89. We could perform only a few of the proposed sensitivity analyses because of the small number of studies included.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides evidence that the diagnostic accuracy of DUS is high, especially at discriminating between the presence or absence of significant carotid artery stenosis (< 50% or 50% to 99%). This evidence, plus its less invasive nature, supports the early use of DUS for the detection of carotid artery stenosis. The accuracy for 70% to 99% carotid artery stenosis and occlusion is high. Clinicians should exercise caution when using DUS as the single preoperative diagnostic method, and the limitations should be considered. There was little evidence of the accuracy of DUS when compared with CTA or MRA. The results of this review should be interpreted with caution because they are based on studies of low methodological quality, mainly due to the patient selection method. Methodological problems in participant inclusion criteria from the studies discussed above apparently influenced an overestimated estimate of prevalence values. Most of the studies included failed to precisely describe inclusion criteria and previous testing. Future diagnostic accuracy studies should include direct comparisons of the various modalities of diagnostic tests (mainly DUS, CTA, and MRA) for carotid artery stenosis since DSA is no longer considered to be the best method for diagnosing carotid stenosis and less invasive tests are now used as reference standards in clinical practice. Also, for future studies, the participant inclusion criteria require careful attention.

A Reappraisal of CT Angiography Derived Duplex Ultrasound Velocity Criteria With a Comparison to Digital Subtraction Angiography in Patients With Carotid Artery Stenosis

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, carotid duplex ultrasound (CDUS) velocity criteria have been derived from angiography. Recent studies support a shift toward computed tomography angiography (CTA) derived velocity criteria; however, they lack a comparison to angiography. The purposes of this study are to validate CTA derived measurements with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and to update our previous CTA-derived velocity criteria for 50% and 80% stenosis.

METHODS

All patients between 2010 and 2019 who underwent CDUS and a neck CTA within 6 months were identified for a retrospective review. Vessel diameter and corresponding CDUS data were recorded. Additional DSA measurements were recorded for a subset of patients. Data from this cohort were added to a previously reported deidentified data set from patients between 2000 and 2009. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine optimal velocity thresholds. Spearman rank correlation was used to correlate measurements obtained by CTA to those obtained by DSA.

RESULTS

A total of 1139 vessels from 636 patients were analyzed. ROC analysis to identify ≥ 50% stenosis resulted in optimized thresholds of 143 cm/sec, 46.2 cm/sec, and 2.15 for peak systolic velocity (PSV), end-diastolic velocity (EDV), and PSV to common carotid artery PSV ratio (PSVR), respectively. ROC analysis to identify ≥ 80% stenosis resulted in optimized thresholds of 319 cm/sec, 87.2 cm/sec, and 3.49 for PSV, EDV, and PSVR, respectively. The degree of carotid artery stenosis for a subset of 124 vessels on CTA correlated well with that of DSA (ρ = 0.89, P< 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate a high correlation between measurements obtained on CTA and DSA while forming reliable CTA-derived CDUS velocity criteria.

Measurement of the Internal Carotid Artery Cross-Sectional Area: Systematic Differences Depending on Grayscale, Power Doppler, and Color Doppler Techniques

OBJECTIVES

To determine how measurements of the internal carotid artery (ICA) cross-sectional area will differ systematically when obtained by grayscale, color Doppler, and power Doppler imaging.

METHODS

A total of 451 patients had greater than 40% diameter stenosis in at least a single ICA. Anteroposterior and transverse luminal diameters were measured in 609 arteries on grayscale, color, and power Doppler transverse images of the carotid bulb and proximal and distal ICAs. Cross-sectional areas were calculated and compared by a repeated-measures analysis of variance model to assess for significant differences.

RESULTS

Mean ICA cross-sectional areas ± SDs as measured by grayscale, power Doppler, and color Doppler imaging were 122 ± 81, 122 ± 79, and 125 ± 79 mm² , respectively. The mean ICA area estimated by color Doppler imaging was significantly greater than that estimated by power Doppler imaging (P < .0001) and grayscale imaging (P = .02). Area estimates on grayscale and power Doppler images were not significantly different (P = .99). After accounting for the correlation of repeated measurements within single vessels, color Doppler estimates of the luminal area were on average 3.44 and 9.5 mm² greater than grayscale and power Doppler estimates. Relative cross-sectional area estimates were on average 9.4% greater with color Doppler imaging at smaller luminal diameters (<60 mm² ) compared with larger luminal diameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurements of the ICA cross-sectional area by color Doppler imaging were significantly greater than those obtained by power Doppler or grayscale imaging. This difference should be considered when stenosis estimates are confirmed or graded by luminal measurements.

Four-dimensional computed tomography angiography analysis of internal carotid arteries opacification at the skull base to detect delayed cerebral ischemia: a feasibility study

PURPOSE

Delayed cerebral ischemia represents a significant cause of poor functional outcome for patients with vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage. We investigated whether delayed cerebral ischemia could be detected by the arterial opacification of internal carotid artery at the level of the skull base.

METHODS

In this exploratory, nested retrospective cohort diagnostic accuracy study, patients with clinical and/or transcranial Doppler suspicion of vasospasm who underwent four-dimensional computed tomography angiography were included. They were split into two groups for the main endpoint analysis, according to the actually adopted morphological (cerebral infarction) and clinical criteria (neurologic deterioration) of delayed cerebral ischemia. Opacification with a temporal resolution of 0.15 s of both internal carotid arteries at the skull base level was obtained through a semi-automated segmentation method based on skeletonization, and analyzed by a wavelet transform (rbio2.2, level 1). The results obtained by k-means clustering were analyzed with regard to the state of delayed cerebral infarction.

RESULTS

Over ten patients included and analyzed, five patients presented a delayed cerebral ischemia, two of them in both side. The semi-automated processing and analysis clustered two different types of opacification curves. The obtaining of a nonlinear opacification pattern was associated (p < 0.001) with delayed cerebral ischemia.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of arterial opacification of internal carotid arteries at skull base by the proposed processing is feasible and leads to cluster two types of opacification that may help to early detect and prevent delayed cerebral ischemia, in particularly when examinations are artifacted by aneurysm treatment materials.

Validation of Risk Prediction Models to Detect Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis

Background Significant asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) is associated with higher risk of strokes. While the prevalence of moderate and severe ACS is low in the general population, prediction models may allow identification of individuals at increased risk, thereby enabling targeted screening. We identified established prediction models for ACS and externally validated them in a large screening population. Methods and Results Prediction models for prevalent cases with ≥50% ACS were identified in a systematic review (975 studies reviewed and 6 prediction models identified [3 for moderate and 3 for severe ACS]) and then validated using data from 596 469 individuals who attended commercial vascular screening clinics in the United States and United Kingdom. We assessed discrimination and calibration. In the validation cohort, 11 178 (1.87%) participants had ≥50% ACS and 2033 (0.34%) had ≥70% ACS. The best model included age, sex, smoking, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes mellitus, vascular and cerebrovascular disease, measured blood pressure, and blood lipids. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for this model was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.74-0.75) for ≥50% ACS and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.77-0.79) for ≥70% ACS. The prevalence of ≥50% ACS in the highest decile of risk was 6.51%, and 1.42% for ≥70% ACS. Targeted screening of the 10% highest risk identified 35% of cases with ≥50% ACS and 42% of cases with ≥70% ACS. Conclusions Individuals at high risk of significant ACS can be selected reliably using a prediction model. The best-performing prediction models identified over one third of all cases by targeted screening of individuals in the highest decile of risk only.

Comparative analysis of CGUARD embolic prevention stent with Casper-RX and Wallstent for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis

Stent protected Angioplasty of extracranial carotid artery stenosis using the dual-layered CGUARD stent is a novel treatment option. In this study we evaluate the feasibility and the safety of the CGUARD in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients in comparison to Casper-RX and Wallstent. This is a multi-center study of consecutive patients treated with the CGUARD, Casper-RX and Wallstent at two German high volume neurovascular centers between April 2017 and May 2018. Patient characteristics, neuroimaging data and angiographic outcome were retrospectively analyzed. The primary end points of the study were acute occlusion of the carotid stent and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH). Carotid artery stenting was performed in 76 patients; of those 26 (34%) were treated with the CGUARD, 25 (33%) with Casper-RX, and 25 (33%) with Wallstent. In 58/76 (76%) cases carotid artery stenosis was symptomatic with a median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale of 4. Angioplasty and stenting as part of a mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke was performed in 25/76 (33%) patients. Baseline patient characteristics were similar between the treatment groups, except for a higher portion of scheduled cases in the Casper-RX group. There were no significant differences in the rate of acute in stent occlusions (CGUARD, 2/26 (8%); Casper-RX, 1/25(4%); Wallstent, 1/25 (4%)) and postinterventional sICH (1/26 (4%), 0/25(0%), 0/25 (0%)). Clinical outcome at discharge did not differ between groups. Treatment of carotid artery stenosis using CGUARD is feasible with a good safety profile comparable to that of Casper-RX and Wallstent.

Carotid Artery Stenosis Contralateral to Intracranial Large Vessel Occlusion: An Independent Predictor of Unfavorable Clinical Outcome After Mechanical Thrombectomy

Background: Clinical outcome in patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy (MT) due to intracranial large vessel occlusion (LVO) in the anterior circulation is influenced by several factors. The impact of a concomitant extracranial carotid artery stenosis (CCAS) contralateral to the intracranial lesion remains unclear. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 392 consecutive patients treated with MT due to intracranial LVO in the anterior circulation in two comprehensive stroke centers between 2014 and 2017. Clinical (including demographics and NIHSS), imaging (including angiographic evaluation of CCAS via NASCET criteria), and procedural data were evaluated. Primary endpoint was an unfavorable clinical outcome defined as modified Rankin Scale 3-6 at 90 days. Results: In 27/392 patients (7%) pre-interventional imaging exhibited a CCAS (>50%) contralateral to the intracranial lesion compared to 365 patients without relevant stenosis. Median baseline NIHSS, procedural timings, and reperfusion success did not differ between groups. Median volume of the final infarct core was larger in CCAS patients (176 cm³, IQR 32-213 vs. 11 cm³, 1-65; p < 0.001). At 90 days, unfavorable outcome was documented in 25/27 CCAS patients (93%) vs. 211/326 (65%; p = 0.003) with a mortality of 63 vs. 19% (p = 0.001), respectively. Presence of CCAS was associated with an unfavorable outcome at 90 days independent of age and baseline NIHSS in multivariate logistic regression (OR 2.2, CI 1.1-4.7; p < 0.05). Conclusion: For patients undergoing MT due to intracranial vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation, the presence of a contralateral CCAS >50% is a predictor of unfavorable clinical outcome at 90 days.

Grading of carotid artery stenosis with computed tomography angiography: whether to use the narrowest diameter or the cross-sectional area

OBJECTIVES

To compare the estimation of carotid artery stenosis by computed tomography angiography (CTA) based on cross-sectional area versus the smallest diameter measurement, and test the accuracy of both CTA measurements using color Doppler ultrasonography (CDUS) as a reference method.

METHODS

For 113 carotid arteries with stenosis ≥50% we analysed the differences in the estimated stenosis level between both CTA methods and CDUS using the Bland-Altman approach. Further, we calculated sensitivity, specificity and plotted receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for both CTA methods.

RESULTS

The mean difference between CDUS and CTA (area) measurements was -0.4% (p = 0.68); between CDUS and CTA (diameter), 20.7% (p < 0.001); and between CTA (area) and CTA (diameter), 21.2% (p < 0.001). Sensitivity and specificity for the CTA (area) method were 81% and 77%, and for CTA (diameter) were 23% and 100%. The area under the curve (AUC) for CTA (diameter) was 0.62 (0.57, 0.66), and for CTA (area) 0.79 (0.71-0.87). The equality test for the two AUCs was <0.0001.

CONCLUSIONS

CTA (diameter)-based measurements significantly underestimated the degree of carotid stenosis. We recommend the CTA (area) method because of its higher predictive power for a correct stenosis classification and a lack of significant difference in the estimated stenosis level, compared to CDUS.

MAIN MESSAGES

• Cross-sectional area measurement considers asymmetric shape of the residual vessel lumen. • CTA (diameter) method on average significantly underestimates the true level of stenosis. • CTA (area) method correctly classifies vessels needing surgical intervention.

Carotid Consensus Panel duplex criteria can replace modified University of Washington criteria without affecting accuracy

The decision to intervene for internal carotid stenosis often depends on the degree of stenosis seen on duplex ultrasound (US). The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic accuracy of two criteria: modified University of Washington (UW) and 2003 Carotid Consensus Panel (CCP). All patients undergoing US in an accredited (IAC) vascular laboratory from January 2010 to June 2015 were reviewed ( n=18,772 US exams). Patients receiving a neck computed tomography angiography (CTA) within 6 months of the US were included in the study ( n=254). The degree of stenosis was determined by UW/CCP criteria and confirmed on CTA images using North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET)/European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST) schema. Kappa analysis with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were utilized to determine duplex–CTA agreement. A total of 417 carotid arteries from 221 patients were assessed in this study. The modified UW criteria accurately classified 266 (63.9%, kappa = 0.321, 95% CI 0.255 to 0.386) cases according to NASCET-derived measurements. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy at ≥ 60% stenosis were 65.7%, 81.3%, and 81.9%. The CCP criteria resulted in 296 (70.9%) accurate diagnoses (kappa = 0.359, 95% CI 0.280 to 0.437). At ≥ 70% stenosis, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 38.8%, 91.6%, and 87.1% for NASCET. Comparison of the duplex results to ECST-derived CTA measurements revealed a similar trend (UW 53.1%, κ = 0.301 vs CCP 62.1%, κ = 0.315). The CCP criteria demonstrate a higher concordance rate with measurements taken from CTAs. The CCP criteria may be more sensitive in classifying clinically significant degrees of stenosis without a loss in diagnostic accuracy.

Carotid Artery Stenosis Contralateral to Acute Tandem Occlusion: An Independent Predictor of Poor Clinical Outcome after Mechanical Thrombectomy with Concomitant Carotid Artery Stenting

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Cerebral ischemic strokes due to extra-/intracranial tandem occlusions (TO) of the anterior circulation are responsible for causing mechanical thrombectomy (MT). The impact of concomitant contralateral carotid stenosis (CCS) upon outcome remains unclear in this stroke subtype.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of 4 international stroke centers between 2011 and 2017. One hundred ninety-seven consecutive patients with anterior TO were treated with MT and acute carotid artery stenting (CAS). Clinical (including demographics and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS]), imaging (including angiographic evaluation of CCS) and procedural data were evaluated. Favorable clinical outcome was defined as modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≤2 at 90 days.

RESULTS

In 186 out of 197 TO patients preinterventional CT angiography was available for analysis, thereof 49 patients (26%) presented with CCS. Median admission NIHSS and procedural timings did not differ between groups. Reperfusion was successful in 38 out of 49 patients (78%) vs. 113 out of 148 patients (76%) without CCS. In stark contrast, rate of favorable outcome at 90 days differed significantly between groups (22 vs. 44%; p < 0.05). The presence of CCS in TO was associated with an unfavorable clinical outcome independent of age and NIHSS in multivariate logistic regression (p < 0.05). Final infarct volume was significantly larger in CCS patients (100 ± 127 vs. 63 ± 77 cm3; p < 0.05). Neither all-cause mortality rates (25 vs. 17%) nor frequency of peri-interventional symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage differed between groups (7 vs. 6%).

CONCLUSION

For patients with anterior TO undergoing MT with concomitant CAS the presence of CCS >50% is an independent predictor of poor clinical outcome. This most likely cause is due to poorer collateral flow to the affected tissue.

Acoustic shadowing impairs accurate characterization of stenosis in carotid ultrasound examinations

OBJECTIVE

Duplex ultrasonography (DUS) has been the mainstay for diagnosing carotid artery stenosis and is often the sole diagnostic modality used prior to intervention. Highly calcified plaque, however, results in an acoustic shadow (AcS) that obscures the vessel lumen and inhibits the sonographer's ability to obtain Doppler velocity measurements. It is unknown whether DUS can accurately determine the degree of carotid stenosis in these settings.

METHODS

From July 2012 to December 2013, all patients with AcS on DUS measuring ≥5 mm in the longitudinal axis were cross-referenced with multidetector computed tomographic angiography (MD-CTA) images of the neck to define the study population. After standardizing the MD-CTA windows, percent stenosis was determined by cross-sectional area reduction using two separate previously described methods based on North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) and European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST) criteria. DUS waveform parameters in the internal carotid artery near the AcS were then compared with these MD-CTA measurements to determine the accuracy of DUS in characterizing the severity of carotid stenosis.

RESULTS

During this period, 8517 DUS studies were performed at the Massachusetts General Hospital, 550 of which had AcS, for an incidence of 6.45%. There were 92 lesions with a concomitant MD-CTA; however, seven were excluded because of poor study quality, because ≥6 months had elapsed between DUS and MD-CTA, or because the patient had undergone carotid reconstruction between studies. Of the 85 remaining lesions, DUS characterized 17 as severe (peak systolic velocity [PSV] >250 cm/s), 31 as moderate (PSV = 151-250 cm/s), and 37 as mild (PSV ≤150 cm/s) stenoses using PSV criteria. PSV weakly correlated with CTA-NASCET (r = 0.361; P = .004) and CTA-ECST (r = 0.306; P = .004) percent stenosis. Using PSV >250 cm/s as the predictor of >70% stenosis, and a ≥70% cutoff by both CTA-ECST and CTA-NASCET methods as the reference measure, DUS sensitivity ranged from 22.7% to 32.5%, specificity from 89.4% to 91.1%, positive predictive value from 88.2% to 76.4%, and negative predictive value from 25% to 60.2%. A subgroup analysis of lesions identified as non-severe by DUS revealed that waveforms with lower deceleration were associated with severe stenosis on CTA.

CONCLUSIONS

In the presence of AcS, DUS alone is inadequate to accurately determine the degree of carotid stenosis with sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive values far below that needed for clinical decision-making. MD-CTA may be necessary for improved characterization of plaque in these AcS lesions. Further studies are needed to determine DUS parameters that may identify patients who should undergo further evaluation with MD-CTA to characterize the true severity of the stenosis.

Carotid revascularization: risks and benefits

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.