4.8 Article

Ultrasonic echolucent carotid plaques predict future strokes

Journal

CIRCULATION
Volume 104, Issue 1, Pages 68-73

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/hc2601.091704

Keywords

arteriosclerosis; stroke; carotid arteries; ultrasonics; follow-up studies

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background-We tested prospectively the hypothesis that stroke development call be predicted by ec echolucency of carotid atherosclerotic plaques in previously symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Methods and Results-We followed incidence of ipsilateral ischemic strokes for 4.4 pears in 111 asymptomatic and 135 symptomatic patients with greater than or equal to 50% relevant carotid artery stenosis. At inclusion. echogenicity of carotid plaques and degree of stenosis were evaluated with high-resolution B-mode ultrasound with computer-assisted image processing and Doppler ultrasound, respectively. We observed 44 ipsilateral ischemic strokes. In symptomatic patients, relative risk of ipsilateral ischemic stroke for echolucent versus echorich plaques was 3.1 (95% CI. 1.3 to 7.3), whereas for 80% to 99% versus 50% to 79% stenosis, the relative risk was 1.4 (95% CI. 0.7 to 3.0). Relative to symptomatic patients with echorich 50% to 79% stenotic plaques, those with echorich 80% to 99% stenotic plaques, echolucent 50% to 79% stenotic plaques, and echolucent 80% to 99% stenotic plaques had relative risks of ipsilaterul ischemic strokes of 3.1 (95% CI, 0.7 to 14), 4.2 (95% CI, 1.2 to 15), and 7.9 (95% CI, 2.1 to 30), equivalent to absolute risk increases of 11%, 18%, and 28%, This was not observed in previously asymptomatic patients. Conclusions-Echolucent plaques causing greater than or equal to 50% diameter stcnosis by Doppler ultrasound are associated with risk of future stroke in symptomatic but not asymptomatic individuals. This suggests that measurement of echolucency, together with degree of stenosis, may improve selection of patients for carotid endarterectomy.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available