4.6 Article

Carotid plaque volume in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY
Volume 105, Issue 3, Pages 262-269

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10670

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Manchester Surgical Research Trust [702313]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The main indication for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is severity of carotid artery stenosis, even though most strokes in carotid disease are embolic. The relationship between carotid plaque volume (CPV) and symptoms of cerebral ischaemia, and the measurement of CPV by minimally invasive tomographic ultrasound imaging, were investigated. Methods: The volume of the endarterectomy specimen was measured using a validated saline suspension technique in patients undergoing CEA. Time from last symptom and severity of stenosis measured by duplex ultrasonography were recorded. Middle cerebral artery emboli were counted using transcranial Doppler imaging (TCD) in a subset of patients. Results: Some 339 patients were included, 270 with symptomatic and 69 with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Mean(s.d.) CPV was higher in symptomatic than in asymptomatic patients (0.97(0.43) versus 0.74(0.41) cm(3); P < 0.001). CPV did not correlate with severity of carotid stenosis (P = 0.770). Mean CPV was highest at 1.03(0.46) cm(3) in the 4 weeks following cerebral symptoms, declining to 0.78(0.36) cm(3) beyond 8 weeks. Among 33 patients who had TCD, mean CPV was 1.00(0.48) cm(3) in the 27 patients with ipsilateral cerebral emboli compared with 0.67(0.16) cm(3) in those without (P = 0.142). There was excellent correlation between CPV measured by tomographic ultrasound imaging and the endarterectomy specimen in 34 patients (r = 0.93, P < 0.001). Conclusion: CPV correlated with symptoms of cerebral ischaemia, but not carotid stenosis. It could be a potential indicator for CEA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available