Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
Volume 20, Issue 7, Supplement , Pages S349-S373 , July 2009

Reporting Standards for Carotid Artery Angioplasty and Stent Placement

  • Randall T. Higashida, MD

      Affiliations

    • University of California, San Francisco, California
  • ,
  • Philip M. Meyers, MD

      Affiliations

    • Columbia University, New York, New York
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to P.M.M., 710 W 168th St, Neurological Institute, New York, NY 10032
  • ,
  • Constantine C. Phatouros, MD

      Affiliations

    • Royal Perth Hospital, Australia
  • ,
  • John J. Connors III, MD

      Affiliations

    • Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Florida
  • ,
  • John D. Barr, MD

      Affiliations

    • Mid-South Imaging and Therapeutics, Memphis, Tennessee
  • ,
  • David Sacks, MD

      Affiliations

    • The Reading Hospital and Medical Center, West Reading, Pennsylvania
  • ,
  • Technology Assessment Committees of the American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology and the Society of Interventional Radiology

Received 12 December 2003 ,Accepted 14 January 2004.

  • Image Result

    Measurement of carotid stenosis using North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET), European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST), and Common Carotid (CC) methods. All three methods demons

    Measurement of carotid stenosis using North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET), European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST), and Common Carotid (CC) methods. All three methods demonstrate a high degree of reproducibility overall. The NASCET method used most frequently in the United States is reliable but tends to underestimate the degree of stenosis. The NASCET ratio should not be applied if there is near-occlusion with reduction in the diameter of the cervical internal carotid artery beyond the stenosis. Such a reduction in the diameter of the internal carotid artery beyond the site of stenosis would consequently underestimate the severity of stenosis. CC and ECST methods grade the stenosis similarly and generally are in agreement. For atherosclerotic disease that narrows the carotid bulb, the percentage difference between NASCET and ECST increases. Carotid stenosis measured at ultrasound tends to correlate better with ECST and CC methods ().

 None of the authors have identified a conflict of interest.This article was copublished in the May 2004 issues of Stroke (Stroke 2004;35:e112-e133.) and the Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. © 2004 American Heart Association, Inc. With permission from the American Heart Association, Inc.

 This article first appeared in J Vasc Interv Radiol 2004; 15:E1–E24.

PII: S1051-0443(09)00303-0

doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2009.04.032

Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
Volume 20, Issue 7, Supplement , Pages S349-S373 , July 2009