Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T06:03:17.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - Conventional digital subtraction angiography for carotid disease

from Luminal imaging techniques

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 December 2009

Jean Marie U-King-Im
Affiliation:
Addenbrooke's Hospital and the University of Cambridge, UK
Jonathan H. Gillard
Affiliation:
Addenbrooke's Hospital and the University of Cambridge, UK
Jonathan Gillard
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Martin Graves
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Thomas Hatsukami
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Chun Yuan
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Carotid endarterectomy is now one of the most commonly performed vascular operations in the Western world, with significant increases in rates since the publication of large randomized trials such as the North American symptomatic carotid endarterectomy trial (NASCET) and the European carotid surgery trial [ECST], which have clearly demonstrated the benefits of surgery over medical therapy in recently symptomatic patients with severe carotid stenosis (randomized trial of endarterectomy for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis: final results of the MRC European carotid surgery trial (ECST), 1998; Barnett et al., 1998; Tu et al., 1998). In these trials, risk stratification was mainly based on severity of luminal stenosis and this has naturally highlighted the importance of accurate carotid imaging for patient selection. The gold standard method, in terms of diagnostic accuracy, for the measurement of stenosis remains conventional digital subtraction angiography (DSA), which was in routine use at the time of these trials. There are, however, several disadvantages associated with DSA. It is a relatively expensive and labor-intensive procedure whose costs may be up to 2.4 times that of alternative procedures such as magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) (U-King-Im et al., 2004a). Moreover, patients, if given the choice, may tend to prefer less invasive modalities such as MRA (U. King-Im et al., 2004c).

Type
Chapter
Information
Carotid Disease
The Role of Imaging in Diagnosis and Management
, pp. 126 - 139
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alvarez-Linera, J., Benito-Leon, J., Escribano, J., Campollo, J. and Gesto, R. (2003). Prospective evaluation of carotid artery stenosis: elliptic centric contrast-enhanced Magnetic resonance angiography and spiral Computerized tomography angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 24, 1012–19.Google ScholarPubMed
Anzalone, N., Scomazzoni, F., Castellano, R., et al. (2005). Carotid artery stenosis: intraindividual correlations of 3D time-of-flight Magnetic resonance angiography, contrast-enhanced Magnetic resonance angiography, conventional Digital subtraction angiography, and rotational angiography for detection and grading. Radiology, 236, 204–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Athanasoulis, C. A. and Plomaritoglou, A. (2000). Preoperative imaging of the carotid bifurcation. Current trends. International Angiology, 19, 1–7.Google ScholarPubMed
Barnett, H. J., Taylor, D. W., Eliasziw, M., et al. (1998). Benefit of carotid endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic moderate or severe stenosis. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators. New England Journal of Medicine, 339, 1415–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bendszus, M., Koltzenburg, M., Burger, R., et al. (1999). Silent embolism in diagnostic cerebral angiography and neurointerventional procedures: a prospective study. Lancet, 354, 1594–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berczi, V., Elfleet, E., Turner, D., Cleveland, T. J. and Gaines, P. A. (2005). Adverse cardiac events as a result of high volume contrast injection during rotational arch aortography. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 16, 558–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berczi, V., Randall, M. and Balamurugan, R. (2006). Safety of arch aortography for assessment of carotid arteries. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, 31, 3–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berg, M. H., Manninen, H. I., Rasanen, H. T., Vanninen, R. L. and Jaakkola, P. A. (2002). Computerized tomography angiography in the assessment of carotid artery atherosclerosis. Acta Radiology, 43, 116–24.Google ScholarPubMed
Britt, P. M., Heiserman, J. E., Snider, R. M., et al. (2000). Incidence of postangiographic abnormalities revealed by diffusion-weighted Magnetic resonance imaging. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 21, 55–9.Google Scholar
Buskens, E., Nederkoorn, P. J., Woude, T. B., et al. (2004). Imaging of carotid arteries in symptomatic patients: cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies. Radiology, 233, 101–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chuah, K. C., Stuckey, S. L. and Berman, I. G. (2004). Silent embolism in diagnostic cerebral angiography: detection with diffusion-weighted imaging. Australasian Radiology, 48, 133–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cloft, H. J., Joseph, G. J. and Dion, J. E. (1999). Risk of cerebral angiography in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage, cerebral aneurysm, and arteriovenous malformation: a meta-analysis. Stroke, 30, 317–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, K. N. and Humphrey, P. R. (1993). Complications of cerebral angiography in patients with symptomatic carotid territory ischaemia screened by carotid ultrasound. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 56, 967–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, S. M. and Donnan, G. A. (2003). Is carotid angiography necessary? Editors disagree. Stroke, 34, 1819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, D. L., Roseberry, C. A. and Fujitani, R. M. (1997). Preoperative testing before carotid endarterectomy: a survey of vascular surgeons' attitudes. Annals of Vascular Surgery, 11, 264–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dion, J. E., Gates, P. C., Fox, A. J., Barnett, H. J. and Blom, R. J. (1987). Clinical events following neuroangiography: a prospective study. Stroke, 18, 997–1004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Earnest, F. T., Forbes, G., Sandok, B. A., et al. (1984). Complications of cerebral angiography: prospective assessment of risk. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology, 142, 247–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eikelboom, B. C., Riles, T. R., Mintzer, R., et al. (1983). Inaccuracy of angiography in the diagnosis of carotid ulceration. Stroke, 14, 882–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg, R., Bank, W. and Hedgcock, M. (1980) Neurologic complications of angiography for cerebrovascular disease. Neurology, 30, 895–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elgersma, O. E., Buijs, P. C. and Wust, A. F. (1999). Maximum internal carotid arterial stenosis: assessment with rotational angiography versus conventional intraarterial digital subtraction angiography. Radiology, 213, 777–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elgersma, O. E., Wust, A. F., Buijs, P. C., et al. (2000). Multidirectional depiction of internal carotid arterial stenosis: three-dimensional time-of-flight Magnetic resonance angiography versus rotational and conventional digital subtraction angiography. Radiology, 216, 511–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eliasziw, M., Rankin, R. N., Fox, A. J., Haynes, R. B. and Barnett, H. J. (1995) Accuracy and prognostic consequences of ultrasonography in identifying severe carotid artery stenosis. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (North American symptomatic carotid endarterectomy trial) Group. Stroke, 26, 1747–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eliasziw, M., Smith, R. F., Singh, N., et al. (1994a). Further comments on the measurement of carotid stenosis from angiograms. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (North American symptomatic carotid endarterectomy trial) Group. Stroke, 25, 2445–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eliasziw, M., Streifler, J. Y. and Fox, A. J. (1994b). Significance of plaque ulceration in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial. Stroke, 25, 304–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Executive Committee for the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. (1995). Executive Committee for the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 1421–8.CrossRef
Falk, E. (1989). Morphologic features of unstable atherothrombotic plaques underlying acute coronary syndromes. American Journal of Cardiology, 63, 114E–20E.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Faught, E., Trader, S. D. and Hanna, G. R. (1979). Cerebral complications of angiography for transient ischemia and stroke: prediction of risk. Neurology, 29, 4–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuster, V., Badimon, L., Badimon, J. and Chesebro, J. (1992). The pathogenesis of coronary artery disease and the acute coronary syndromes. New England Journal of Medicine, 326, 242–50.Google ScholarPubMed
Grzyska, U., Freitag, J. and Zeumer, H. (1990). Selective cerebral intraarterial Digital subtraction angiography. Complication rate and control of risk factors. Neuroradiology, 32, 296–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hankey, G. J., Warlow, C. P. and Molyneux, A. J. (1990a). Complications of cerebral angiography for patients with mild carotid territory ischaemia being considered for carotid endarterectomy. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 53, 542–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hankey, G. J., Warlow, C. P. and Sellar, R. J. (1990b). Cerebral angiographic risk in mild cerebrovascular disease. Stroke, 21, 209–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heiserman, J. (2005). Measurement error of percent diameter carotid stenosis determined by conventional angiography: implications for noninvasive evaluation. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 26, 2102–7.Google ScholarPubMed
Heiserman, J. E., Dean, B. L., Hodak, J. A., et al. (1994). Neurologic complications of cerebral angiography. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 15, 1401–7; discussion 1408–11.Google ScholarPubMed
Imparato, A. M., Riles, T. S. and Gorstein, F. (1979). The carotid bifurcation plaque: pathologic findings associated with cerebral ischemia. Stroke, 10, 238–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnston, D. C., Chapman, K. M. and Goldstein, L. B. (2001). Low rate of complications of cerebral angiography in routine clinical practice. Neurology, 57, 2012–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnston, D. C., Eastwood, J. D., Nguyen, T. and Goldstein, L. B. (2002). Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of carotid arteries: utility in routine clinical practice. Stroke, 33, 2834–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kappelle, L. J., Eliasziw, M., Fox, A. J., Sharpe, B. L. and Barnett, H. J. (1999). Importance of intracranial atherosclerotic disease in patients with symptomatic stenosis of the internal carotid artery. The North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial. Stroke, 30, 282–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langan, E. M., , 3rd, Gray, B. H. and Sullivan, T. M. (2005). Carotid angiography in contemporary vascular surgery practice. Seminars in Vascular Surgery, 18, 83–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, D. H., Ahn, J. H., Jeong, S. S., Eo, K. S. and Park, M. S. (2004). Routine transradial access for conventional cerebral angiography: a single operator's experience of its feasibility and safety. British Journal of Radiology, 77, 831–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leffers, A. M. and Wagner, A. (2000). Neurologic complications of cerebral angiography. A retrospective study of complication rate and patient risk factors. Acta Radiologica, 41, 204–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loftus, I. M., Mccarthy, M. J. and Pau, H. (1998). Carotid endarterectomy without angiography does not compromise operative outcome. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, 16, 489–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logason, K., Karacagil, S. and Hardermark, H. (2002). Carotid endarterectomy soley based on duplex scan findings. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, 36, 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, A., Lepoutre, A., Corbillon, E., Branchereau, A. and Kretz, J. G. (2002). Modalities of preoperative imaging of the internal carotid artery used in France. Annals of Vascular Surgery, 16, 261–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lovett, J. K. and Rothwell, P. M. (2003). Site of carotid plaque ulceration in relation to direction of blood flow: an angiographic and pathological study. Cerebrovascular Diseases, 16, 369–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lovett, J. K., Gallagher, P. J., Hands, L. J., Walton, J. and Rothwell, P. M. (2004). Histological correlates of carotid plaque surface morphology on lumen contrast imaging. Circulation, 110, 2190–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mani, R. L., Eisenberg, R. L., Mcdonald, E. J. Jr., Pollock, J. A. and Mani, J. R. (1978). Complications of catheter cerebral arteriography: analysis of 5,000 procedures. I. Criteria and incidence. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology, 131, 861–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matsumoto, Y., Hongo, K., Toriyama, T., Nagashima, H. and Kobayashi, S. (2001). Transradial approach for diagnostic selective cerebral angiography: results of a consecutive series of 166 cases. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 22, 704–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Murphy, K. (2005). Simplicity, voxels and finding the signal in the noise. Annals of Neurology, 58, 493–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nohara, A. M. and Kallmes, D. F. (2003). Transradial cerebral angiography: technique and outcomes. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 24, 1247–50.Google ScholarPubMed
Norris, J. W., Morriello, F., Rowed, D. W. and Maggisano, R. (2003). Vascular imaging before carotid endarterectomy. Stroke, 34, E16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osarumwense, D., Pararajasingham, R., Wilson, P., Abraham, J. and Walker, S. (2005). Carotid artery imaging in the United Kingdom: a postal questionnaire of current practice. Vascular, 13, 173–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Porsche, C., Walker, L., Mendelow, D. and Birchall, D. (2001). Evaluation of cross-sectional luminal morphology in carotid atherosclerotic disease by use of spiral Computerized tomography angiography. Stroke, 32, 2511–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pozzi Mucelli, F., Calgaro, A., Bruni, S., Bottaro, L. and Pozzi Mucelli, R. (2005). Three-dimensional rotational angiography of the carotid arteries with high-flow injection from the aortic arch. Preliminary experience. La Radiologia Medica, 109, 108–17.Google ScholarPubMed
Randomised trial of endarterectomy for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis: final results of the Medical research council European Carotid Surgery Trial (European carotid surgery). (1998). Lancet, 351, 1379–87.
Robless, P. and Halliday, A. (1999). Vascular Surgical Society of Great Britain and Ireland: carotid angiography is used more selectively in the Asymptomatic Carotid Surgery Trial. British Journal of Surgery, 86, 690–1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rothwell, P. M., Gibson, R. J., Slattery, J., Sellar, R. J. and Warlow, C. P. (1994a). Equivalence of measurements of carotid stenosis. A comparison of three methods on 1001 angiograms. European Carotid Surgery Trialists' Collaborative Group. Stroke, 25, 2435–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, P. M., Gibson, R. J., Slattery, J. and Warlow, C. P. (1994b). Prognostic value and reproducibility of measurements of carotid stenosis. A comparison of three methods on 1001 angiograms. European Carotid Surgery Trialists' Collaborative Group. Stroke, 25, 2440–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, P. M., Gibson, R. and Warlow, C. P. (2000a). Interrelation between plaque surface morphology and degree of stenosis on carotid angiograms and the risk of ischemic stroke in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis. On behalf of the European Carotid Surgery Trialists' Collaborative Group. Stroke, 31, 615–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, P. M., Pendlebury, S. T., Wardlaw, J. and Warlow, C. P. (2000b). Critical appraisal of the design and reporting of studies of imaging and measurement of carotid stenosis. Stroke, 31, 1444–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, P. M., Eliasziw, M., Gutnikov, S. A., et al. (2003a). Analysis of pooled data from the randomised controlled trials of endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. Lancet, 361, 107–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, P. M., Gutnikov, S. A. and Warlow, C. P. (2003b). Reanalysis of the final results of the European Carotid Surgery Trial. Stroke, 34, 514–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rouleau, P. A., Huston, J., 3rd, , Gilbertson, J., et al. (1999). Carotid artery tandem lesions: frequency of angiographic detection and consequences for endarterectomy. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 20, 621–5.Google ScholarPubMed
Skalpe, I. O. (1988). Complications in cerebral angiography with iohexol (Omnipaque) and meglumine metrizoate (Isopaque cerebral). Neuroradiology, 30, 69–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spagnoli, L. G., Mauriello, A., Sangiorgi, G.,et al. (2004). Extracranial thrombotically active carotid plaque as a risk factor for ischemic stroke. Journal of the American Medical Association, 292, 1845–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Streifler, J. Y., Eliasziw, M., Fox, A. J., et al. (1994). Angiographic detection of carotid plaque ulceration. Comparison with surgical observations in a multicenter study. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial. Stroke, 25, 1130–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trivedi, R. A., U-King-Im, J. M., Graves, M. J., et al. (2004). Magnetic resonance imaging-derived measurements of fibrous-cap and lipid-core thickness: the potential for identifying vulnerable carotid plaques in vivo. Neuroradiology, 46, 738–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tu, J. V., Hannan, E. L., Anderson, G. M., et al. (1998). The fall and rise of carotid endarterectomy in the United States and Canada. New England Journal of Medicine, 339, 1441–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turner, W. H. and Murie, J. A. (1989). Intravenous digital subtraction angiography for extracranial carotid artery disease. British Journal of Surgery, 76, 1247–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
U-King-Im, J., Hollingworth, W., Trivedi, R., et al. (2005). Cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies prior to carotid endarterectomy. Annals of Neurology, 58, 506–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
U-King-Im, J., Hollingworth, W., Trivedi, R. A., et al. (2004a). Contrast-enhanced Magnetic resonance angiography vs intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography for carotid imaging: activity-based cost analysis. European Radiology, 14, 730–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U-King-Im, J., Trivedi, R. A., Cross, J. J., et al. (2004b). Measuring carotid stenosis on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography. Diagnostic performance and reproducibility of 3 different methods. Stroke, 35, 2083–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.-King-Im, J., Trivedi, R., Cross, J., et al. (2004c). Conventional digital subtraction x-ray angiography versus magnetic resonance angiography in the evaluation of carotid disease: patient satisfaction and preferences. Clinical Radiology, 59, 358–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U-King-Im, J., Trivedi, R. A., Graves, M. J., et al. (2004d). Contrast-enhanced Magnetic resonance angiography for carotid disease: diagnostic and potential clinical impact. Neurology, 62, 1282–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanninen, R., Manninen, H. and Soimakallio, S. (1995). Imaging of carotid artery stenosis: clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 16, 1875–83.Google ScholarPubMed
Wardlaw, J. M., Chappell, F. M., Stephenson, M., et al. (2006). Accurate, practical and cost-effective assessment of carotid stenosis in the UK. Health Technology Assessments, 10, 1–200.Google ScholarPubMed
Wardlaw, J. M., Lewis, S. C., Humphrey, P., et al. (2001). How does the degree of carotid stenosis affect the accuracy and interobserver variability of magnetic resonance angiography?Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 71, 155–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waugh, J. R. and Sacharias, N. (1992). Arteriographic complications in the Digital subtraction angiography era. Radiology, 182, 243–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Willinsky, R. A., Taylor, S. M., Terbrugge, K., et al. (2003). Neurologic complications of cerebral angiography: prospective analysis of 2,899 procedures and review of the literature. Radiology, 227, 522–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolpert, S. M. (1999). Neuroradiology classics. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 20, 1752–3.Google ScholarPubMed
Young, G. R., Humphrey, P. R., Nixon, T. E. and Smith, E. T. (1996a). Variability in measurement of extracranial internal carotid artery stenosis as displayed by both digital subtraction and magnetic resonance angiography: an assessment of three caliper techniques and visual impression of stenosis. Stroke, 27, 467–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, G. R., Sandercock, P. A., Slattery, J., et al. (1996b). Observer variation in the interpretation of intra-arterial angiograms and the risk of inappropriate decisions about carotid endarterectomy. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 60, 152–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, C., Mitsumori, L. M., Beach, K. W. and Maravilla, K. R. (2001). Carotid atherosclerotic plaque: noninvasive Magnetic resonance characterization and identification of vulnerable lesions. Radiology, 221, 285–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×