(Stroke. 1997;28:1895-1897.)
© 1997 American Heart Association, Inc.
Articles |
From the Department of Neurology, Wayne State University/Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, Mich.
Correspondence to Seemant Chaturvedi, MD, Department of Neurology, Wayne State University, 6E-UHC, 4201 St Antoine, Detroit, MI 48201. E-mail Schaturv{at}med.wayne.edu
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods We surveyed hospitals with an accredited radiology residency program.
Results Of the 200 radiology program directors who were sent the survey, 97 responded. The angiographic complication rate was known in 68 of 97 medical centers and averaged 0.6%. The most common method being used for measurement of carotid stenosis is the NASCET method (70%). Forty-two of 97 program directors reported a decrease in the volume of angiography being performed. Of these 42, one third reported that CE was commonly being performed on the basis of noninvasive tests alone.
Conclusions The angiographic complication rate at American teaching hospitals is within the "acceptable" range. The NASCET method of stenosis measurement is the most popular among academic radiologists. The volume of cerebral angiography appears to be decreasing. How these data compare with community hospitals without an accredited radiology residency program warrants further study.
Key Words: carotid endarterectomy carotid stenosis cerebral angiography
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The radiological evaluation of extracranial carotid stenosis has also been plagued by controversy.7 8 9 The controversy and confusion have arisen partly because of different imaging modalities available to assess carotid artery disease (eg, ultrasound, MR angiography, conventional angiography) and partly because of different methods by which angiographic stenosis is quantified.
We undertook a study to ascertain practices of academic radiologists in the evaluation of carotid artery stenosis. We were specifically interested in determining the following: (1) the major complication rate of cerebral angiography; (2) methods used for angiographic measurement of stenosis; and (3) whether CE was being done without cerebral angiography in a significant number of medical centers.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
It was requested that the program director have the survey completed by the individual with the greatest knowledge of the subject matter (eg, neuroradiology section head).
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Despite these limitations, we believe the study provides important information pertaining to practices of academic radiologists in the evaluation of carotid artery disease. With regard to the issue of complications of cerebral angiography, published studies have indicated a range varying from a less than 1% major complication rate to a 3% to 4% rate of permanent stroke and/or death.12 13 The angiographic morbidity and mortality rate of 0.6% reported by medical centers in this study is comparable to what can be achieved at major medical centers. In NASCET, an international, multicenter trial, the angiographic stroke rate in over 2200 patients has been approximately 0.7%.14 Therefore, although one would ideally like to have no complications from a diagnostic procedure, the angiographic complication rate reported in this study is within the "acceptable" range.
In close to one third of the medical centers, the angiographic complication rate was unknown. This is not entirely surprising, since in a recent study we demonstrated that the morbidity and mortality from CE is unknown in over 50% of academic medical centers.15 Clearly, there needs to be greater quality control and accountability among hospitals and physicians in terms of preoperative and postoperative evaluations of patients with carotid stenosis.
According to recent systematic reviews, perioperative rates for stroke and death are higher in symptomatic CE patients than in asymptomatic CE patients.16 17 Therefore, the impact of angiographic complications is especially important for the patient with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. In general, the risk-benefit ratio of CE for this population is much narrower than for a patient with high-grade, recently symptomatic stenosis. Thus, a patient with severe, symptomatic stenosis may have 10 times the risk of stroke from CE compared with the angiogram, whereas in asymptomatic patients, the ratio of stroke from CE compared with angiography is closer to 4:1 or 5:1. In the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study, the risks of perioperative stroke were almost equivalent to the risks of angiographic stroke. In any case, there is a necessity for each medical center where CE is undertaken to strictly audit and record the angiographic complication rate, and this is especially significant for patients with asymptomatic stenosis.
With regard to methods of carotid artery stenosis measurement, the main modalities used in randomized clinical trials have been the NASCET method and the ECST method. Others have advocated using the distal common carotid artery as the reference point18 or utilizing estimation of the residual lumen.19 Our study demonstrates that the NASCET method either alone or in combination with "eyeballing" is overwhelmingly favored by American academic radiologists. Whether consumers of radiology services, such as neurologists and surgeons, strictly adhere to the NASCET method of stenosis measurement when reviewing angiograms is uncertain. However, some surgical services have found the NASCET method of stenosis measurement to be reliable and reproducible.20
As a result of the potential morbidity of cerebral angiography, some clinicians and imagers have suggested that noninvasive techniques, either alone or in a battery, may suffice as a preoperative radiological strategy.21 22 There may be other incentives for CE without angiography, including the possibility of reduced costs, which carries a certain appeal with third party payers. These points are somewhat at odds, however, with the fact that all the randomized clinical trials of CE have used angiography as the basis for stenosis grading. It is interesting to note that a substantial proportion of medical centers in our group (43%) reported a decline in the volume of cerebral angiography being performed. This may be due to a greater reliance on noninvasive imaging, although only a minority of the centers in our study (14%) are commonly performing CE without angiography. This figure is comparable to the rate of CE without angiography being observed in the Aspirin and Carotid Endarterectomy Trial of 13% (W. Taylor, poster reprint, 1997).
One further note is the fact that the questionnaire in this study was sent only to medical centers with an accredited residency. How these data compare with community hospitals without an accredited radiology residency is unknown at this juncture. If one speculates that a community hospital radiology department does less cerebral angiography than a "major academic medical center," then perhaps the angiographic complication rates are higher at smaller community facilities. Data from other interventional procedures such as cardiac angioplasty have shown that procedure volume is linked to the complication rate.23
In summary, our study suggests that cerebral angiography is still an integral part of the preoperative imaging strategy at major medical centers in the United States and that it is being performed with acceptable levels of morbidity. Future studies should address the practices of neurologists and surgeons in carotid artery stenosis assessment, as well as the impact of managed care on perioperative imaging trends.
| Selected Abbreviations and Acronyms |
|---|
|
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
Received June 2, 1997; revision received July 9, 1997; accepted July 22, 1997.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. M. U-King-Im, M. J. Graves, J. J. Cross, N. J. Higgins, J. Wat, R. A. Trivedi, T. Tang, S. P. S. Howarth, P. J. Kirkpatrick, N. M. Antoun, et al. Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis: Accuracy of Subjective Visual Impression for Evaluation with Digital Subtraction Angiography and Contrast-enhanced MR Angiography Radiology, July 1, 2007; 244(1): 213 - 222. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. R. Rutgers, J. D. Blankensteijn, and J. van der Grond Preoperative MRA Flow Quantification in CEA Patients : Flow Differences Between Patients Who Develop Cerebral Ischemia and Patients Who Do Not Develop Cerebral Ischemia During Cross-Clamping of the Carotid Artery Stroke, December 1, 2000; 31(12): 3021 - 3028. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Aoki, H. Nakajima, H. Kumagai, and T. Araki Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Angiography and MR Imaging of the Carotid Artery: High-Resolution Sequences in Different Acquisition Planes AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., February 1, 2000; 21(2): 381 - 385. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
O. E. H. Elgersma, M. van Leersum, P. C. Buijs, M. S. van Leeuwen, Y. T. van de Schouw, B. C. Eikelboom, and Y. van der Graaf Changes Over Time in Optimal Duplex Threshold for the Identification of Patients Eligible for Carotid Endarterectomy Stroke, November 1, 1998; 29(11): 2352 - 2356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Stroke Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1997 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |