Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Purpose:

To compare conventional angiography (CA) and rotational angiography (RA) to assess the degree of angiographically-measured stenosis versus cross-sectional area (CSA) stenosis in an in vitro carotid model.

Methods:

Various grades of stenosis were created by adhering different amounts of silicone rubber sealant onto the inner wall of clear, radiolucent tubes. Following 2- and 3-projection CA and 20-projection RA, the tubes were transected at the actual maximum stenosis. The cross-sectional areas were digitally photographed, and CSA stenosis was calculated using ImageJ planimeter software. The differences among CA, RA, and CSA stenosis measurements were compared statistically.

Results:

There was no significant difference between RA and CSA stenosis measurements (p=0.46). Conventional angiography with 2 or 3 projections between 0° and 90° underestimated the severity of disease in 19 (63%) of 30 samples. The maximum stenosis percentage was significantly lower in CA versus RA (p<0.0001 in 2-projection, p<0.0003 in 3-projection) and in CA versus CSA stenosis (p<0.0004 in 2-projection, p<0.001 in 3-projection). The maximum stenosis percentages measured by RA were less than CSA stenosis in 5 (71.4%) of 7 tubes (p=NS) containing 50% to 69% stenoses. Eight tubes had mountain-shaped lesions, which was significantly overestimated by RA (11.5%±9.7%, p<0.012).

Conclusion:

CA with 2 or 3 projections significantly underestimates the maximum stenosis in an in vitro model. RA may overestimate disease in patients with mountain-shaped plaques and may underestimate disease if the stenosis is <70%. Our data suggest that CA should not be the gold standard for the qualification of carotid endarterectomy in asymptomatic patients, nor for vascular laboratory quality assurance analysis.

Keywords

in vitro model carotid artery stenosis angiography rotational angiography stenosis measurement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators. Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med. 1991; 325: 445–453.

Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Executive Committee for the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study. JAMA. 1995; 273: 1421–1428.

Hobson

II Weiss

Fields

. Efficacy of carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis: The Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1993; 328: 221–227.

Hankey

Warlow

Sellar

. Cerebral angiographic risk in mild cerebrovascular disease. Stroke. 1990; 21: 209–222.

Theodotou

Whaley

Mahaley

. Complication following transfemoral cerebral angiography for cerebral ischemia: Report of 159 angiograms and correlation with surgical risk. Surg Neurol. 1987; 28: 90–92.

Pan

Saloner

Reilly

. Assessment of carotid artery stenosis by ultrasonography, conventional angiography, and magnetic resonance angiography: Correlation with ex vivo measurements of plaque stenosis. J Vasc Surg. 1995; 21: 82–89.

Rubin

Bondi

Rhodes

. Duplex scanning versus conventional arteriography for the evaluation of carotid artery plaque morphology. Surgery. 1987; 102: 749–755.

Schenk

Bond

Aretz

. Multicenter validation study of real-time ultrasonography, arteriography, and pathology: Pathologic evaluation of carotid endarterectomy specimens. Stroke. 1988; 19: 289–296.

Alexandrov

Bladin

Maggisano

. Measuring carotid stenosis: Time for a reappraisal. Stroke. 1993; 24: 1292–1296.

10.

Elgersma

Buijs

Wust

. Maximum internal carotid artery stenosis: Assessment with rotational angiography versus conventional intraarterial digital subtraction angiography. Radiology. 1999; 213: 777–783.

11.

Elgersma

Wust

Buijs

. Multidirectional depiction of internal carotid arterial stenosis: Three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography versus rotational and conventional digital subtraction angiography. Radiology. 2000; 216: 511–516.

12.

Schulte-Altedorneburg

Droste

Felszeghy

. Accuracy of in vivo carotid B-mode ultrasound compared with pathological analysis: Intima-media thickening, lumen diameter, and cross-sectional area. Stroke. 2001; 32: 1520–1524.

13.

Benedetti-Valentini

Gossetti

Irace

. Carotid surgery without angiography is possible and safe. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2000; 41: 601–605.

14.

Melissano

Castellano

Zucca

. Results of carotid endarterectomy performed with preoperative duplex ultrasound assessment alone. Vasc Surg. 2001; 35: 95–101.

15.

Long

Lepoutre

Corbillon

. Critical review of non- or minimally invasive methods (duplex ultrasonography, MR- and CT-angiography) for evaluating stenosis of the proximal internal carotid artery. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2002; 24: 43–52.

16.

Filis

Arko

Johnson

. Duplex ultrasound criteria for defining the severity of carotid stenosis. Ann Vasc Surg. 2002; 16: 413–421.

17.

Morasch

Gurjala

Washington

. Cross-sectional magnetic resonance angiography is accurate in predicting degree of carotid stenosis. Ann Vasc Surg. 2002; 16: 266–272.

Should Conventional Angiography Be the Gold Standard for Carotid Stenosis?