ABSTRACT
Objective:To analyze the correlation between cognitive impairment and cortical atrophy in elderly patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (ACAS).Methods:In this cross-sectional study, 40 consecutive elderly patients with ACAS treated in the Department of Neurology, Northern Jiangsu People′s Hospital from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021 (ACAS group), and 40 elderly healthy controls who accepted physical examination during the same period (control group) were included. Cognitive assessment was performed using the Mental State Examination Scale (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA), and brain magnetic resonance imaging scanning was performed in the ACAS group. The artificial intelligence technique was applied for brain lobe segmentation and cortical volume calculation. The χ2-test, independent sample t-test and Wilcoxon non-parametric test were used to analyze the difference of clinical data and cognitive scores between the two groups. In the ACAS group, the cortical volumes of the side with carotid stenosis was compared with that of the normal side, and Spearman′s correlation analysis was used to assess the correlation between cognitive scores and cortical atrophy. Results:Compared with the control group, the ACAS group got significantly lower scores of MMSE and MoCA, as well as lower scores of visuospatial executive function, attention and calculation, language function, abstraction ability and delayed recall [(25.60±2.49) vs (27.18±1.01), (22.05±3.59) vs (25.60±1.43), (2.73±1.04) vs (4.08±0.62), (4.53±0.93) vs (5.03±0.66), 2.00 (0.00) vs 3.00 (0.00), 1.00 (1.00) vs 2.00 (0.00), and (2.95±0.96) vs (3.35±0.62)] (all P<0.05). There was not significant differences in naming and orientation ability between the two groups (both P>0.05). The volume of cortical, temporal lobe, frontal lobe, parietal lobe and insular lobe on the side with carotid stenosis in the ACAS group were significantly smaller than those on the normal side [186.23 (177.97, 202.53) vs 194.67 (185.65, 204.82) cm 3, 54.74 (50.66, 56.95) vs 55.61 (51.24, 58.49) cm 3, 72.98 (70.76, 78.34) vs 75.27 (72.34, 80.66) cm 3, 53.66 (51.11, 57.86) vs 56.59 (52.80, 60.09) cm 3, 6.57 (6.35, 7.07) vs 6.72 (6.46, 7.34) cm 3] (all P<0.05). The MoCA score in the ACAS group was positively related to the cortical volume ratio of the two sides ( r=0.427, P<0.01). The attention ( r=0.353) and abstraction ( r=0.226) ability scores were positively correlated with the temporal lobe volume ratios of the two sides (both P<0.05). The visuospatial executive ( r=0.187) and language ( r=0.373) ability scores were positively correlated with frontal lobe volume ratios of the two sides (both P<0.05), and visuospatial executive ( r=0.386), naming ( r=0.344), language ( r=0.517), abstraction ( r=0.335) and delayed recall ( r=0.333) ability scores were positively correlated with parietal lobe volume ratios of the two sides (all P<0.05). Conclusion:In elderly patients with ACAS, the cognitive impairment and cortical atrophy on the sides with carotid stenosis are significant and a positive correlation is detected between them.
ABSTRACT
Resumo Contexto Artérias carótidas são locais de frequentes patologias, sendo a mais comum a aterosclerose, podendo resultar na formação de placas com estenose. Para avaliarmos as carótidas em pacientes assintomáticos, o método de ultrassonografia Doppler ou ecodoppler é, atualmente, o exame de eleição, indicado para a triagem e o diagnóstico de lesões vasculares. As diretrizes atuais recomendam o rastreamento em pacientes que apresentem fatores de risco para estenose carotídea e que estejam aptos e dispostos ao tratamento medicamentoso/intervenção carotídea. A triagem em pacientes assintomáticos na população adulta em geral e sem fatores de risco significativos não é recomendada. Objetivos Avaliar se os especialistas médicos se baseiam na literatura para solicitar o ecodoppler como screening. Métodos Realizou-se seleção retrospectiva dos pacientes a partir da solicitação de ecodoppler. Os dados coletados foram computados e analisados com o programa RStudio versão 1.3.959. Resultados Avaliou-se a solicitação como adequada, desde que os pacientes apresentassem pelo menos um fator de risco para placas carotídeas. Entre 152 pacientes, 55 preenchiam critérios para screening de carótidas, a principal indicação na população estudada foi o check-up vascular. Hipertensão arterial foi o fator de risco mais prevalente. Os especialistas em cirurgia vascular obtiveram êxito maior ao solicitar o exame de maneira adequada [razão de chances de indicações corretas de 3,52 (IC 1,14-10,87), com p = 0,02]. A assertividade nas indicações de ecodoppler foi de 36% (IC95% 29-42%). Conclusões Conclui-se que houve excesso de solicitação de ultrassonografia de carótidas como screening. Os cirurgiões vasculares solicitaram o exame de maneira mais assertiva.
Abstract Background Carotid arteries are frequently the site of pathologies, the most common being atherosclerosis, which may result in the formation of plaques, causing stenosis. Doppler ultrasound is currently the exam of choice for assessment of the carotid arteries in asymptomatic patients to screen for and diagnose vascular lesions. Current guidelines recommend screening patients who have risk factors for carotid stenosis and who are able and willing to undergo medical treatment and/or carotid intervention. Screening asymptomatic patients in the general adult population who have no significant risk factors is not recommended. Objectives To assess whether medical experts rely on the literature to request Doppler ultrasound for screening. Methods A retrospective selection of patients was performed based on requests for carotid ultrasound. The data collected were computed and analyzed using RStudio version 1.3.959. Results The request was evaluated as appropriate as long as the patients presented at least one risk factor for carotid plaques. Fifty-five out of 152 patients met criteria for carotid screening. The most frequent indication in the study population was vascular check-up. Arterial hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor. Vascular surgery specialists were more likely to order the exam correctly (odds ratio for correct indications: 3.52 [CI 1.14 - 10.87], with p=0.02). The rate of correct Doppler ultrasound requests was 36% (95%CI 29 to 42%). Conclusions An excess of requests for carotid ultrasound screening was found in this study. Vascular surgeons more often requested the test correctly.
ABSTRACT
Extracranial carotid stenosis is a well-established, modifiable risk factor for stroke. Asymptomatic extracranial carotid stenosis is increasingly being detected due to the introduction of less-invasive and more-sensitive advanced diagnostic technologies. For severe asymptomatic stenosis, earlier pivotal clinical trials demonstrated the benefit of carotid endarterectomy over the best medical therapy. Since then, great advances have been made in interventional and medical therapies as well as surgical techniques. The first edition of the Korean Stroke Clinical Practice Guidelines for primary stroke prevention for the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis reflected evidences published before June 2007. After the publication of the first edition, several major clinical trials and observational studies have been published, and major guidelines updated their recommendation. Accordingly, the writing group of Korean Stroke Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) decided to provide timely updated evidence-based recommendations. The Korean Stroke CPG writing committee has searched and reviewed literatures related to the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis including published guidelines, meta-analyses, randomized clinical trials, and nonrandomized studies published between June 2007 and Feb 2011. We summarized the new evidences and revised our recommendations. Key changes in the updated guidelines are the benefit of intensive medical therapy and further evidence of carotid artery stenting as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy. The current updated guidelines underwent extensive peer review by experts from the Korean Stroke Society, Korean Society of Intravascular Neurosurgery, Korean Society of Interventional Neuroradiology, Korean Society of Cerebrovascular Surgery, and Korean Neurological Association. New evidences will be continuously reflected in future updated guidelines.