| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Departments of Anesthesiology (E.J.H., D.C.A., S.D.S), Neurology
(E.J.H.), Surgery (G.J.T.), Neurosurgery (R.A.S., D.O.Q., T.F.C., E.S.C.), and
The Irving Center for Clinical Research (D.J.M.), Columbia University, New
York, NY.
Correspondence to Eric J. Heyer, MD, PhD, Department of Anesthesiology, Columbia University, PH 5535, 630 W 168th St, New York, NY 10032-3784. E-mail ejh3{at}columbia.edu
MethodsPatients were evaluated preoperatively and
postoperatively before hospital discharge and at follow-up 1 and 5
months later with a battery of neuropsychometric tests. The results
were analyzed by both event-rate and group-rate
analyses. For event-rate analysis, change was defined
as either a decline or improvement in postoperative neuropsychometric
performance by 25% or more compared with a preoperative
baseline.
ResultsApproximately 80% of patients showed decline in one or
more test scores, and 60% had one or more improved test scores at the
first follow-up examination. The percentage of declined test scores
decreased and the percentage of improved test scores increased with
subsequent follow-up examinations. Group-rate analysis was
similar for group performance on individual tests. However, a
decline in performance was seen most commonly on verbal memory
tests, and improved performance was seen most commonly on
executive and motor tests.
ConclusionsNeuropsychometric evaluation of patients undergoing
carotid endarterectomy for significant carotid
artery stenosis demonstrates both declines and improvements in
neuropsychometric performance. The test changes that showed
decreased performance may be associated with ischemia from
global hypoperfusion or embolic phenomena, and the improvement seen may
be related to increased cerebral blood flow from removal of
stenosis.
Although the incidence of major morbidity associated with CEA is low,
the incidence of subtle neurological injury is unknown but undoubtedly
depends on the measures of assessing injury. For example, it is
reasonably well accepted that a significant percentage of patients
having cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass develop
neurological injury.5 6 However, while only
approximately 5% develop "major" neurological changes determined
by a neurological examination, almost 67% have more subtle changes in
cerebral function as determined by a battery of neuropsychometric
tests.5 Although the etiology of neurological
injury has not been definitively established, emboli probably play a
significant role.
Stroke is a rare event after CEA; however, subtle changes in
neuropsychometric performance may be seen after carotid artery
surgery.7 The aim of this study was to determine
the incidence of subtle neurological changes in patients undergoing
CEA.
Anesthesia
Surgery
Neuropsychometric Evaluation
Any new neurological finding was determined by the surgeon, according
to usual criteria. With the use of "event-rate" analysis,
each patient's overall neuropsychometric performance was
assessed by comparing preoperative and postoperative scores for each
test (difference scores). For an individual test to be considered
changed, there had to be at least a 25% change in the postoperative
difference score, ie, deterioration was a 25% decrease and improvement
was a 25% increase in postoperative compared with preoperative
performance. These changes will hereafter be referred to as a
declined or improved test score, respectively.
Statistical Measures
Follow-up examinations were performed at three times: between 1 and 6
days after surgery (mean, 2.6±3.4 days; mode, 1 day; median, 1 day
[±SD]), 1 month (1.2±0.7 months), and 5 months (5.6±2.1 months).
The number of patients seen at follow-up 3 (n=33) was significantly
smaller than those seen at follow-up 1 (n=102), because about a third
of our patients were seen off-site at this time, and one surgeon did
not follow his cases beyond 1 month.
Neuropsychometric performance was evaluated in two ways:
either by event-rate analysis or by group-rate
analysis. With the former, difference scores were calculated
for each patient and each test. The number of tests that declined or
improved by 25% or more was determined for each patient. Then the
number of patients with 0, only 1, only 2, only 3, or 4 or more tests
changed was counted, and the percentage of the total number of patients
was tabulated for declined or improved performance (Table 2
Patients improved significantly between follow-up examinations 1,
2, and 3. This is shown in Table 2
There were fewer patients with more than two declined tests and more
patients with more than two improved tests at each follow-up
examination (follow-ups 1, 2, and 3). At follow-up 1, no differences in
neuropsychometric performance were found depending on the side
of the CEA (P=0.62) or whether a venous graft was used
(based on the Mann-Whitney rank sum tests [P=0.62 or
P=0.47] for declined or improved tests; results not
shown).
The data were also analyzed to determine whether age or the
presence of hypertension significantly determined the percentage of
patients with declined test performance. Patients were divided
into two age groups: 72 years or younger (58 patients) and greater than
72 years (45 patients). Seventy-two years was chosen because it was the
median age of our patient population as a whole. The mean (SD) in each
group was 65.1 (5.9) and 77.1 (3.6) years. The distribution of declined
tests was different when we used the Mann-Whitney rank sum test
(P=0.033), with older patients having more declined tests.
However, while 63 patients had a history of hypertension and 40 did
not, the distribution of declined tests was not different between these
patient groups when we used the Mann-Whitney rank sum test
(P=0.901).
Group means and SDs are shown in Table 3
Significant EEG changes were found in seven patients (6.2%), and all
had insertion of a shunt. All patients with significant EEG changes had
two or more neuropsychometric tests changed. Only one patient had a
postoperative stroke (0.9% stroke rate). That patient did not have an
intraoperative EEG change and had only one declined neuropsychometric
test at the follow-up 1 examination; however, he had three declined
neuropsychometric tests at the follow-up 2 examination.
Different neuropsychometric tests showed decreased or improved function
(Figure
The criterion for defining a significant change in neuropsychometric
test performance can affect the reported incidence of cerebral
dysfunction.12 For declined and improved
performance, we considered a 25% change from baseline to be
significant. Using percent change in neuropsychometric
performance minimizes the problem posed by patients who score
significantly below the mean on their baseline examination and
therefore cannot decline on follow-up examinations if a fixed numerical
decrease, such as 1 SD or more, is required. There are no clear
guidelines for judging what is a significant improvement in
performance because such improvement may in part reflect
"practice effect." Even in an elderly surgical population, patients
significantly improved their performance with repeated
neuropsychometric testing.13
To provide a measure of confidence that significant improvement
and deterioration of performance occurred, we also looked at
the percentage of patients who showed improved or decreased
performance for each test individually. Our logic is as
follows. Since some tests like Trails A and B tend to show improvement
in part because of practice effect, then this test is an excellent
measure to determine decreased performance. Indeed,
approximately 15% decreased performance at follow-ups 1 and 2.
Since other tests like the Buschke Selective Reminding test are more
likely to show deterioration in performance, then this test is
an excellent measure of improved performance. In fact, 8% and
14% of patients improved at follow-up 1 and 19% and 29% of patients
improved at follow-up 3 on LTR and CLTR, respectively. These
percentages are approximately what one would find if significant
changes were defined as more than two neuropsychometric tests changed
for improved or decreased performance.
Regardless of how neuropsychometric performance is measured,
those patients with decreased test performance at the first
follow-up examination improved with subsequent examinations, and
patients with improved performance continued to have more tests
improved. However, all of the tests were not equally likely to show
decline or improvement. The verbal memorybased test showed most of
the decreased performance, and tests that required executive
and motor functions, such as Trails A and B, Finger Tapping, and
Grooved Pegboard, showed most improvement.
Our results are similar to other studies that have been performed
on similar populations.14 15 However, unlike
previous studies in which either improvement16 17
or deterioration7 18 of function was determined,
we have evaluated our data by both event- and group-rate
analyses to find individuals and tests that show the most
improvement or deterioration. Not all tests showed deterioration or
improvement to the same degree. Tasks requiring motor functions, ie,
mechanical, were more likely to demonstrate improved postoperative
function than language-based tasks (Figure
What accounts for decreased function? To perform CEA, the internal and
common carotid arteries are cross-clamped. There is a transient
decrease in CBF in the ipsilateral middle cerebral artery in many
patients reflected in decreased cerebral blood velocity (measured by
transcranial Doppler19,20), and
CBF (measured by xenon CBF21). If the change in
hemispheric CBF is significant enough to change neuronal functioning,
there may be a change in the EEG.22 Indeed,
patients with EEG changes have a higher probability of having a
stroke.23 24 However, that is not the only
mechanism producing a postoperative stroke. A large percentage of
patients have evidence of gaseous and particulate emboli in the middle
cerebral artery associated with CEA.14 25
Particulate embolization during the dissection period appears to be
correlated with neuropsychometric
deterioration.14 Many clinicians consider
thromboembolic phenomena the most common etiology for producing
cerebral injury.26 27 28 One can hypothesize that
subtle deficits may result from these emboli.
What explanations account for improved function? This problem has been
addressed in a previous study. Bornstein et al17
compared the performance of patients having CEA to two control
groups: one a surgical population in which surgery did not involve the
brain or cerebral vasculature, and the other a nonoperative population
with cerebrovascular symptoms. Performance on their
neuropsychometric battery was significantly improved in patients having
CEA on the right carotid artery who had had a stroke compared with all
other groups.17 In addition to these effects,
patients had increased CBF in the ipsilateral middle cerebral artery
postoperatively29 30 and increased cerebral area
perfused.30 These increases may lead to improved
neuropsychometric performance.15 In
general, improvement occurred in those patients who had low
flowendangered brains.15 31 32 This may explain
why patients having CEA with low preoperative CBF had greater
improvement in a battery of neuropsychometric tests than a control
group also having CEA for carotid artery stenosis but with
hemodynamically insignificant
lesions.31 However, rarely, this increased flow
may be deleterious.21 Owens et
al15 demonstrated that if patients with greater
than 50% stenosis had normal CT scans and computerized
radionuclide angiograms before and after CEA, they showed cognitive
improvement as measured by a battery of neuropsychometric tests in the
immediate postoperative period (3 to 10 days) but deteriorated in their
cognitive performance if these tests demonstrated evidence of
small infarcts or if there was clinical evidence of a stroke. Only
those with small infarcts improved at later follow-up testing (3 to 6
months).15 Our patients all had greater than 70%
stenosis; some were symptomatic, but most were
asymptomatic. This population falls into the group that
others have shown to have the most improvement in postoperative
neuropsychometric performance.15 31
Whether these explanations are responsible for our observations remains
to be demonstrated. Clearly performance on some tests improves
with repetition, ie, the practice effect. The contribution of this
effect awaits further investigation with a large control
population.
In future investigations our hope is to correlate these changes with
other independent parenchymal markers of cerebral injury and
intraoperative events that occur during surgery, such as changes in CBF
or the number of emboli, that may be predictive of those patients who
will have deterioration of function so that either technical or
pharmaceutical intervention can be instituted to decrease the incidence
of these problems.
Received December 22, 1997;
revision received March 9, 1998;
accepted March 9, 1998.
© 1998 American Heart Association, Inc.
Original Contributions
Neuropsychometric Changes in Patients After Carotid Endarterectomy
![]()
Abstract
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Background and PurposeOne hundred
twelve patients undergoing elective carotid
endarterectomy for symptomatic and
asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis were enrolled
in a prospective study to evaluate the incidence of change in
postoperative cerebral function.
Key Words: carotid endarterectomy cerebral ischemia neuropsychological tests vascular surgery
![]()
Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Stroke is the leading
cause of disability and the third leading cause of death in the United
States. It has devastating physical, psychological, and socioeconomic
consequences. At present, therapy for completed strokes is limited.
Extracranial carotid atherosclerotic disease is thought to be a
principal cause of strokes and is the major risk factor in 15% to 20%
of patients. One method of prophylactic therapy to prevent
strokes from occurring is surgery. More than one million operations for
carotid artery stenosis have been performed in the United
States since the early 1950s. Within the past decade, a number of
prospective multicenter studies have compared medical and surgical
therapy in either symptomatic1 2 or
asymptomatic3 4 patients with carotid
artery stenosis. The conclusions of these studies are that CEA
is the most effective means of preventing stroke when the
stenosis is greater than 70% in symptomatic and
60% in asymptomatic patients at centers where surgical
morbidity and mortality are less than 3%. Because of these studies, we
have seen a dramatic increase in the number of patients undergoing this
type of surgery.
![]()
Subjects and Methods
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
One hundred twelve patients undergoing elective CEA were
recruited to participate in this institutional review boardapproved
study. All patients had at least 70% stenosis of the operative
carotid artery. After written informed consent was obtained, patients
were assessed at four times with a battery of neuropsychometric tests:
(1) before surgery (112 patients) to establish a performance
baseline, (2) between 1 and 6 days after surgery (follow-up 1: 102
patients), (3) 1 month after surgery (follow-up 2: 76 patients), and
(4) 5 months after surgery (follow-up 3: 33 patients). Two patients who
had baseline evaluations withdrew from the study, 6 patients missed the
follow-up 1 examination, and 4 patients missed the follow-up 2
examination but had one or more subsequent follow-up examinations. All
examinations were performed 3 hours or more after any analgesic or
sedative medication was administered.
No patients were premedicated. General anesthesia
was induced primarily with fentanyl, midazolam (mean total doses [SD]
were 2.3 [0.9]) µg/kg and 0.05 [0.14]) mg/kg, respectively), and
vecuronium 6.5 [4.9] mg or rocuronium 82.5 [27.5] mg and maintained
with isoflurane ([0.2 to 0.5]exp) as tolerated.
Standard monitors were applied including an arterial
catheter for measuring blood pressure continuously. All
hemodynamic data plus temperature were monitored
continuously and recorded every minute by a PC-based data
acquisition system (Lifelog from MI2) or manually
in a small number of cases. In addition, continuous eight-channel EEG
monitoring was performed on all patients (Neurotrac II). After the
internal carotid artery was cross-clamped, a significant EEG change was
defined as 50% or greater decrease in amplitude in the alpha or beta
frequencies and a similar increase in the delta or theta frequencies,
or complete loss of all cerebral electrical activity.
All operations were performed by one of three surgeons
(G.J.T., D.O.Q., R.A.S.). The surgery for CEA consisted of positioning
the patient supine with the head in an extended midline position. An
incision was made along a skin crease from just below the angle of the
mandible to near the midline through skin, subcutaneous tissue, and
platysma. The common, internal, and external carotid arteries were
exposed and controlled. A shunt was prepared and used only if changes
consistent with cerebral ischemia were noted on the
EEG. After heparin (5000 or 6000 U) was administered
intravenously, the common, internal, and external carotid
arteries were occluded. A longitudinal incision was made in the common
carotid artery proximal to the bifurcation and extended into the
internal carotid artery distal to the plaque. The atheroma
was removed with the use of a dissector. Firmly attached intact intima
was left above and below the area of atheroma resection.
When a vein patch was inserted, it was taken from the proximal
saphenous vein (G.J.T.). Before the final sutures were placed,
back-bleeding from the common, internal, and external carotid arteries
was performed, and the lumen was washed with heparinized saline. Debris
and air were expelled by releasing the clip on the superior thyroid
artery, which provided inflow as the final sutures were secured. Clamps
were sequentially removed from the external, common, and internal
carotid arteries. Heparin was reversed selectively with protamine by
one of the surgeons (G.J.T.).
A battery of neuropsychometric tests was administered with
essentially the same battery recommended by a consensus
group.8 All examinations were administered by a
trained neuropsychologist (S.D.S.). Eight scores were generated from
this battery of four neuropsychometric tests, each of which was chosen
to evaluate a different cognitive domain.9 10
Halstead-Reitan Trails Parts A and B evaluated "visual conceptual and
visuomotor tracking" by timing how long it took a subject to connect
consecutively numbered circles with a single line on one work sheet
(Part A) and then connect the same number of consecutively numbered and
lettered circles on another worksheet by alternating between
the two sequences (Part B).9 The repetitive Fine
Finger Tapping test measured manual dexterity by having the subject tap
for 10 seconds with the index finger a device that recorded the
number of taps.9 This trial was repeated for five
trials if the numbers of taps were within 10% of each other. If they
varied by more than 10%, then five additional trials were performed.
The score was the average of all the trials. Dominant and nondominant
hands were tested separately. The Grooved Pegboard test measured
complex motor coordination with dominant and nondominant hands
separately by timing how long it took a subject to place 25 ridged pegs
into an equal number of slotted holes angled in different
directions.9 The Buschke Selective Reminding test
was used to determine verbal memory.11 Subjects
were read a list of 12 words by the examiner and then asked to repeat
them back. The subject was reminded of any word that was not repeated
and then asked to repeat the entire list of 12 words. This procedure
was repeated for a total of 12 trials. Performance was scored
as long-term retrieval (LTR) and consistency of long-term
retrieval (CLTR).9 To minimize the practice
effect on the Buschke Selective Reminding test, alternate word lists
were used postoperatively. These tests primarily evaluate fine motor
control, executive function, and verbal memory.
The number of neuropsychometric tests changed by 25% or more
was calculated for each patient. Then the number of patients with 0,
only 1, only 2, only 3, or 4 or more changed tests (either declined or
improved) was determined. We compared this distribution at the three
follow-up times using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The data
were analyzed in two ways: (1) pairwise, ie, comparing the
patient's performance for follow-up 1 to 2, 1 to 3, and 2 to
3; and (2) including only patients having all four tests. In addition,
the Mann-Whitney rank sum test was used when two different samples were
compared. Deterioration on more than three tests is generally
considered indicative of significantly impaired neuropsychometric
performance.5 In addition,
repeated-measures ANOVA on the eight neuropsychometric tests (baseline
minus first, baseline minus second, and baseline minus third follow-up
examinations) was used to evaluate the effect of time. To determine
whether patients lost to follow-up started from different baselines,
between-groups analyses were performed. These analyses
were performed with SAS Proc GLM (SAS Institute). All statistical tests
were evaluated with a two-tailed type 1 error rate of 5%.
![]()
Results
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
The demographic and anesthetic variables are shown in
Table 1
for all patients. Patients with a
venous patch sewn into the carotid artery had statistically longer
durations of cross-clamp times (Table 1
). There were equal numbers of
male and female patients and left and right CEAs (Table 1
). Most
patients had a history of hypertension (55.5%), and many had diabetes
mellitus (16.4%), previous stroke or transient ischemic attack
(36.7%), and previous myocardial infarction (21.1%). A small number
of patients had previous CEA (9.4%) on the opposite side (Table 1
).
The demographic profiles for the patients having follow-up 2 and
follow-up 3 examinations, as well as those who missed these follow-up
times points, were identical to those of the baseline group,
demonstrating that those who were lost to follow-up were no different
in their demographic profiles from those actually tested.
View this table:
[in a new window]
Table 1. Demographic and Intraoperative
Parameters
). For example, at follow-up 1, 13.7%
of all patients had no neuropsychometric tests declined, whereas 18.6%
had only 1, 33.3% had only 2, 20.6% had only 3, and 13.3% had 4 or
more declined tests (Table 2
).
View this table:
[in a new window]
Table 2. Decline or Improvement in Neuropsychometric
Performance on Follow-up Examinations
, in which with each follow-up
examination the percentage of patients with no (zero) declined tests
increased, and the percentage of patients with more than two declined
tests decreased. Subtle changes were detected by neuropsychometric
tests at all follow-up periods. When we compared follow-up 1 with
follow-up 2 (n=66, where n is the number of
patients) and follow-up 1 with follow-up 3 (n=26), the
Wilcoxon signed-rank test yielded P<0.02 for
decreased performance and P=0.002 and
P=0.011 for improved performance, respectively;
there was no significant difference for follow-up 2 compared with
follow-up 3 for decreased or improved performance (Table 2
).
However, when we required that all four tests be completed, there were
23 patients in the Wilcoxon signed-rank test calculation. Under
these conditions, the comparison of follow-up 1 to 2, 1 to 3, and 2 to
3 yielded P=0.30, P=0.05, and P=0.35
for declined tests and P=0.08, P=0.005, and
P=0.34 for improved tests.
for four examinations as part of the group-rate analysis. By
repeated-measures ANOVA, all tests showed significant changes
(P<0.05) as a function of time except for Fine Finger
Tapping, dominant and nondominant hands. When compared pairwise with
baseline and with significance defined as P<0.05,
Halstead-Reitan Trails Parts A and B were unchanged at the first
follow-up period and improved significantly at the second and third
follow-up periods. The Buschke Selective Reminding tests (LTR and CLTR)
were both impaired at the first follow-up period, and only LTR was
impaired at the second follow-up period. The Grooved Pegboard test for
the dominant hand was impaired only at the first follow-up period, and
both were improved at the third follow-up period. To test whether there
was any bias due to the fact that only some patients returned for all
of the follow-up examinations, we determined whether baseline
performance for each follow-up group differed in the initial
performance for each neuropsychometric test. We found that
patients who had only the first follow-up examination had more
impairment at baseline in the Grooved Pegboard test for the dominant
hand. All other tests did not show any difference in their baseline
group scores for all of the follow-up periods. Therefore, we do not
consider this finding for the Grooved Pegboard test to be
important.
View this table:
[in a new window]
Table 3. Neuropsychological Test Scores
). The percentage of patients with
declined performance on the four neuropsychometric tests is
plotted on this bar graph for each score at the three follow-up times.
For example, at follow-up 1 approximately 18% of patients had a 25%
or greater decrease in performance on the Trails A test
(Figure
, top panel); however, at follow-up 2 and follow-up 3, a smaller
percentage of patients had declined performance. The Buschke
Selective Reminding test was most likely to be decreased and remain so,
while the Grooved Pegboard test was likely to be decreased at the first
follow-up but to improve at subsequent follow-up examinations. Trails A
and B and Fine Finger Tapping were most likely to have improved
performance at the first follow-up examination and to improve
further with subsequent examinations.

View larger version (33K):
[in a new window]
Figure 1. Percentage of patients showing a decline (top) or improvement
(bottom) in neuropsychological test performance as a function
of the specific tests. The eight tests are noted on the bottom for both
graphs. TrailsA indicates Halstead-Reiten Trails A test; TrailsB,
Halstead-Reiten Trails B test; FT, Fine Finger Tapping test; Dom,
dominant hand; ND, nondominant hand; PB, Grooved Pegboard test; #1 FU,
first follow-up examination; #2 FU, second follow-up examination; and
#3 FU, third follow-up examination.
![]()
Discussion
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Although the neurological examination is the traditional measure
of injury to the central nervous system, subtle changes in neurological
function may be overlooked. A battery of neuropsychometric tests offers
a more detailed assessment of higher cortical functioning. Because the
results from different clinical studies on patients having cardiac
surgery have varied, a consensus group was convened, which suggested
that at least four specific neuropsychometric tests be administered so
that different studies become more comparable.8
We followed these guidelines with one exception. The Buschke Selective
Reminding test was substituted for an equivalent test, the Rey Auditory
Verbal Learning test, because we have used it extensively in previous
studies and these two tests appear to evaluate similar verbal memory
tasks.9
). During and after the
course of surgery, certain hemodynamic and vascular
events might account for some of these changed neuropsychometric
performances.
![]()
Selected Abbreviations and Acronyms
CBF
=
cerebral blood flow
CEA
=
carotid endarterectomy
CLTR
=
consistency of long-term retrieval (Buschke Selective
Reminding test)
EEG
=
electroencephalogram, electroencephalographic
LTR
=
long-term retrieval (Buschke Selective Reminding test)
![]()
Acknowledgments
This study was supported in part by a grant from National
Institutes of Health, Division of Research Resources, General Clinical
Research Centers Program (5 MO1 RR00645) (to D.J.M.) and by an award
from Herbert and Florence Irving (to E.J.H). Dr Heyer is a Herbert
Irving Assistant Professor of Anesthesiology. We would like to thank
Drs S. Mayer and P. Martin for reviewing the manuscript.
![]()
References
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. J. Heyer, M. I. Gold, E. W. Kirby, J. Zurica, E. Mitchell, H. J. Halazun, L. Teverbaugh, R. R. Sciacca, R. A. Solomon, D. O. Quest, et al. A Study of Cognitive Dysfunction in Patients Having Carotid Endarterectomy Performed with Regional Anesthesia Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2008; 107(2): 636 - 642. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A.S. Turk, I. Chaudry, V.M. Haughton, B.P. Hermann, H.A. Rowley, K. Pulfer, B. Aagaard-Kienitz, D.B. Niemann, P.A. Turski, R.L. Levine, et al. Effect of Carotid Artery Stenting on Cognitive Function in Patients With Carotid Artery Stenosis: Preliminary Results AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., February 1, 2008; 29(2): 265 - 268. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. J. Heyer, D. A. Wilson, D. H. Sahlein, J. Mocco, S. C. Williams, R. Sciacca, A. Rampersad, R. J. Komotar, J. Zurica, A. Benvenisty, et al. APOE-{varepsilon}4 predisposes to cognitive dysfunction following uncomplicated carotid endarterectomy Neurology, December 13, 2005; 65(11): 1759 - 1763. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. M. Ho, D. B. Arciniegas, J. Grigsby, M. McCarthy Jr, G. O. McDonald, T. E. Moritz, A. L. Shroyer, G. K. Sethi, W. G. Henderson, M. J. London, et al. Predictors of cognitive decline following coronary artery bypass graft surgery Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2004; 77(2): 597 - 603. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.C. de la Torre Alzheimer Disease as a Vascular Disorder: Nosological Evidence Stroke, April 1, 2002; 33(4): 1152 - 1162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. J. Heyer, R. Sharma, A. Rampersad, C. J. Winfree, W. J. Mack, R. A. Solomon, G. J. Todd, P. C. McCormick, J. G. McMurtry, D. O. Quest, et al. A Controlled Prospective Study of Neuropsychological Dysfunction Following Carotid Endarterectomy Arch Neurol, February 1, 2002; 59(2): 217 - 222. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. C. Pettigrew, N. Thomas, V. J. Howard, R. Veltkamp, and J. F. Toole Low mini-mental status predicts mortality in asymptomatic carotid arterial stenosis Neurology, July 12, 2000; 55(1): 30 - 34. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Crawley, J. Stygall, S. Lunn, M. Harrison, M. M. Brown, and S. Newman Comparison of Microembolism Detected by Transcranial Doppler and Neuropsychological Sequelae of Carotid Surgery and Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty Stroke, June 1, 2000; 31(6): 1329 - 1334. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Stroke Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1998 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |