Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Stroke
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Published Online
on March 19, 2009

Stroke. 2009
Published online before print March 19, 2009, doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.547117
A more recent version of this article appeared on May 1, 2009
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
40/5/1698    most recent
STROKEAHA.109.547117v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Macdonald, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Macdonald, S.
Related Collections
Right arrow Carotid Stenosis
Right arrow Angioplasty and Stenting

Submitted on January 12, 2009
Accepted on February 11, 2009

Towards Safer Carotid Artery Stenting. A Scoring System for Anatomic Suitability

Sumaira Macdonald FRCP, FRCR, PhD*; Robert Lee MSc; Robin Williams FRCR; Gerry Stansby FRCS, MD; on behalf of the Delphi Carotid Stenting Consensus Panel

From the Department of Radiology (S.M., R.W.), Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Department of Medical Statistics (R.L.), University of Edinburgh, UK; and the Department of Vascular Surgery (G.S.), Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: sumaira.macdonald{at}nuth.nhs.uk.

Backgrounds and Purpose—To develop a scoring system to facilitate case selection for carotid artery stenting based on anatomic features.

Methods—Twelve experts comprising a multinational and multispecialty panel were convened. Delphi consensus methodology was applied over 4 "rounds" involving emailed questionnaires, private decision-making, structured interaction and explicit aggregation. In round 1 panelists proposed individual anatomic features that were considered relevant during carotid artery stenting. In round 2 each criterion was scored from 1 (straightforward) to 9 (difficult). Round 3 involved removing some factors based on individual scores to reduce the number of subsequent combination anatomies. The final round involved scoring 96 combination anatomies (representing a "full factorial" design) plus a dichotomous response, ie, whether carotid artery stenting should or should not be advised for a "novice."

Results—There were 1164 responses, providing a score for 12 individual anatomic features and for 96 combinations anatomies with good level of agreement between panelists. After derivation of mean (and standard deviation) of the cutting scores for 1152 yes/no responses a scoring system for combination anatomy was produced, comprising broad agreement bands presented as traffic light colors: red for particularly difficult anatomy, amber for moderate difficulty and green for lesser difficulty.

Conclusion—A scoring system has been developed, based on objective expert consensus, which can be used to categorise expected difficulty of carotid artery stenting and aid case selection.


Key words: carotid artery disease • stents • carotid • Delphi technique • scoring methods