Why are we still debating criteria for carotid artery stenosis?
- PMID: 33178802
- PMCID: PMC7607093
- DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-1188a
Why are we still debating criteria for carotid artery stenosis?
Abstract
The risk of new or recurrent stroke is high among patients with extracranial carotid artery stenosis and the benefit of carotid revascularization is associated to the degree of luminal stenosis. Catheter-based digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the diagnostic gold-standard for carotid stenosis (CS) has been replaced by non-invasive techniques including duplex ultrasound, computed-tomography angiography, and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). Duplex ultrasound is the primary noninvasive diagnostic tool for detecting, grading and monitoring of carotid artery stenosis due to its low cost, high resolution, and widespread availability. However, as discussed in this review, there is a wide range of practice patterns in use of ultrasound diagnostic criteria for carotid artery stenosis. To date, there is no internationally accepted standard for the gradation of CS. Discrepancies in ultrasound criteria may result in clinically relevant misclassification of disease severity leading to inappropriate referral, or lack of it, to revascularization procedures, and potential for consequential adverse outcome. The Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound (SRU), either as originally outlined or in a modified form, are the most common criteria applied. However, such criteria have received criticism for relying primarily on peak systolic velocities, a parameter that when used in isolation could be misleading. Recent proposals rely on a multiparametric approach in which the hemodynamic consequences of carotid narrowing beyond velocity augmentation are considered for an accurate stenosis classification. Consensus criteria would provide standardized parameters for the diagnosis of CS and considerably improve quality of care. Accrediting bodies around the world have called for consensus on unified criteria for diagnosis of CS. A healthy debate between professionals caring for patients with CS regarding optimal CS criteria still continues.
Keywords: Carotid artery stenosis; diagnostic criteria; ultrasound.
2020 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-1188a). The series “Carotid Artery Stenosis and Stroke: Prevention and Treatment Part I” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. HLG reports other from Flexlife Health, outside the submitted work; and is a non-compensated member of the Board of Directors of IAC Vascular Testing. TR reports grants from National Institute of Health, outside the submitted work. The other author has no other conflicts of interest to declare.
Figures
References
-
- Hall HA, Bassiouny HS. Pathophysiology of carotid atherosclerosis. In: Nicolaides A, Beach KW, Kyriacou E, et al. editors. Ultrasound Carotid Bifurc Atheroscler. New York: Springer; 2012:27-39.
Publication types
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources