Multinational Survey of Current Practice from Imaging to Treatment of Atherosclerotic Carotid Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: In the last 20-30 years, there have been many advances in imaging and therapeutic strategies for symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals with carotid artery stenosis. Our aim was to examine contemporary multinational practice standards. METHODS: Departmental Review Board approval for this study was obtained, and 3 authors prepared the 44 multiple choice survey questions. Endorsement was obtained by the European Society of Neuroradiology, American Society of Functional Neuroradiology, and African Academy of Neurology. A link to the online questionnaire was sent to their respective members and members of the Faculty Advocating Collaborative and Thoughtful Carotid Artery Treatments (FACTCATS). The questionnaire was open from May 16 to July 16, 2019. RESULTS: The responses from 223 respondents from 46 countries were included in the analyses including 65.9% from academic university hospitals. Neuroradiologists/radiologists comprised 68.2% of respondents, followed by neurologists (15%) and vascular surgeons (12.9%). In symptomatic patients, half (50.4%) the respondents answered that the first exam they used to evaluate carotid bifurcation was ultrasound, followed by computed tomography angiography (CTA, 41.6%) and then magnetic resonance imaging (MRI 8%). In asymptomatic patients, the first exam used to evaluate carotid bifurcation was ultrasound in 88.8% of respondents, CTA in 7%, and MRA in 4.2%. The percent stenosis upon which carotid endarterectomy or stenting was recommended was reduced in the presence of imaging evidence of "vulnerable plaque features" by 66.7% respondents for symptomatic patients and 34.2% for asymptomatic patients with a smaller subset of respondents even offering procedural intervention to patients with <50% symptomatic or asymptomatic stenosis. CONCLUSIONS: We found heterogeneity in current practices of carotid stenosis imaging and management in this worldwide survey with many respondents including vulnerable plaque imaging into their decision analysis despite the lack of proven benefit from clinical trials. This study highlights the need for new clinical trials using vulnerable plaque imaging to select high-risk patients despite maximal medical therapy who may benefit from procedural intervention.

Misconceptions regarding the adequacy of best medical intervention alone for asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Medical intervention (risk factor identification, lifestyle coaching, and medication) for stroke prevention has improved significantly. It is likely that no more than 5.5% of persons with advanced asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) will now benefit from a carotid procedure during their lifetime. However, some question the adequacy of medical intervention alone for such persons and propose using markers of high stroke risk to intervene with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and/or carotid angioplasty/stenting (CAS). Our aim was to examine the scientific validity and implications of this proposal. METHODS: We reviewed the evidence for using medical intervention alone or with additional CEA or CAS in persons with ACS. We also reviewed the evidence regarding the validity of using commonly cited makers of high stroke risk to select such persons for CEA or CAS, including markers proposed by the European Society for Vascular Surgery in 2017. RESULTS: Randomized trials of medical intervention alone versus additional CEA showed a definite statistically significant CEA stroke prevention benefit for ACS only for selected average surgical risk men aged less than 75 to 80 years with 60% or greater stenosis using the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial criteria. However, the most recent measurements of stroke rate with ACS using medical intervention alone are overall lower than for those who had CEA or CAS in randomized trials. Randomized trials of CEA versus CAS in persons with ACS were underpowered. However, the trend was for higher stroke and death rates with CAS. There are no randomized trial results related to comparing current optimal medical intervention with CEA or CAS. Commonly cited markers of high stroke risk in relation to ACS lack specificity, have not been assessed in conjunction with current optimal medical intervention, and have not been shown in randomized trials to identify those who benefit from a carotid procedure in addition to current optimal medical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Medical intervention has an established role in the current routine management of persons with ACS. Stroke risk stratification studies using current optimal medical intervention alone are the highest research priority for identifying persons likely to benefit from adding a carotid procedure.

Successes and Challenges in Implementation of Radon Control Activities in Iowa, 2010-2015.

BACKGROUND: Radon gas has recently become more prominent in discussions of lung cancer prevention nationally and in Iowa. A review in 2013 of cancer plans in the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program found that 42% of cancer plans, including Iowa's, had terminology on radon. Plans included awareness activities, home testing, remediation, policy, and policy evaluation. COMMUNITY CONTEXT: Iowa has the highest average radon concentrations in the United States; 70% of homes have radon concentrations above the Environmental Protection Agency's action levels. Radon control activities in Iowa are led by the Iowa Cancer Consortium, the Iowa Department of Public Health, and the Iowa Radon Coalition. METHODS: A collaborative approach was used to increase levels of awareness, testing, and (if necessary) mitigation, and to introduce a comprehensive radon control policy in Iowa by engaging partners and stakeholders across the state. OUTCOME: The multipronged approach and collaborative work in Iowa appears to have been successful in increasing awareness: the number of radon tests completed in Iowa increased by 20% from 19,600 in 2009 to 23,500 in 2014, and the number of mitigations completed by certified mitigators increased by 108% from 2,600 to more than 5,400. INTERPRETATION: Through collaboration, Iowa communities are engaged in activities that led to increases in awareness, testing, mitigation, and policy. States interested in establishing a similar program should consider a multipronged approach involving multiple entities and stakeholders with different interests and abilities. Improvements in data collection and analysis are necessary to assess impact.

Systematic Review of Guidelines for the Management of Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We systematically compared and appraised contemporary guidelines on management of asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. METHODS: We systematically searched for guideline recommendations on carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid angioplasty/stenting (CAS) published in any language between January 1, 2008, and January 28, 2015. Only the latest guideline per writing group was selected. Each guideline was analyzed independently by 2 to 6 authors to determine clinical scenarios covered, recommendations given, and scientific evidence used. RESULTS: Thirty-four eligible guidelines were identified from 23 different regions/countries in 6 languages. Of 28 guidelines with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis procedural recommendations, 24 (86%) endorsed CEA (recommended it should or may be provided) for ≈50% to 99% average-surgical-risk asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis, 17 (61%) endorsed CAS, 8 (29%) opposed CAS, and 1 (4%) endorsed medical treatment alone. For asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis patients considered high-CEA-risk because of comorbidities, vascular anatomy, or undefined reasons, CAS was endorsed in 13 guidelines (46%). Thirty-one of 33 guidelines (94%) with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis procedural recommendations endorsed CEA for patients with ≈50% to 99% average-CEA-risk symptomatic carotid artery stenosis, 19 (58%) endorsed CAS and 9 (27%) opposed CAS. For high-CEA-risk symptomatic carotid artery stenosis because of comorbidities, vascular anatomy, or undefined reasons, CAS was endorsed in 27 guidelines (82%). Guideline procedural recommendations were based only on results of trials in which patients were randomized 12 to 34 years ago, rarely reflected medical treatment improvements and often understated potential CAS hazards. Qualifying terminology summarizing recommendations or evidence lacked standardization, impeding guideline interpretation, and comparison. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review has identified many opportunities to modernize and otherwise improve carotid stenosis management guidelines.

Predictors and clinical significance of progression or regression of asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine baseline clinical and ultrasonographic plaque factors predictive of progression or regression of asymptomatic carotid stenosis and the predictive value of changes in stenosis severity on risk of first ipsilateral cerebral or retinal ischemic events (including stroke). METHODS: A total of 1121 patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis of 50% to 99% in relation to the bulb diameter (European Carotid Surgery Trial [ECST] method) underwent six monthly clinical assessments and carotid duplexes for up to 8 years (mean follow-up, 4 years). Progression or regression was considered present if there was a change of at least one grade higher or lower, respectively, persisting for at least two consecutive examinations. RESULTS: Regression occurred in 43 (3.8%), no change in 856 (76.4%), and progression in 222 (19.8%) patients. Younger age, high grades of stenosis, absence of discrete white areas in the plaque, and taking lipid lowering therapy were independent baseline predictors of increased incidence of regression. High serum creatinine, male gender, not taking lipid lowering therapy, low grades of stenosis, and increased plaque area were independent baseline predictors of progression. One hundred and thirty first ipsilateral cerebral or retinal ischemic events, including 59 strokes, occurred. Forty (67.8%) of the strokes occurred in patients whose stenosis was unchanged, 19 (32.2%) in those with progression, and zero in those with regression. For the entire cohort, the 8-year cumulative ipsilateral cerebral ischemic stroke rate was zero in patients with regression, 9% if the stenosis was unchanged, and 16% if there was progression (average annual stroke rates of 0%, 1.1%, and 2.0%, respectively; log-rank, P = .05; relative risk in patients with progression, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-3.25). For patients with baseline stenosis 70% to 99% in relation to the distal internal carotid (North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial [NASCET] method), in the absence of progression (n = 349), the 8-year cumulative ipsilateral cerebral ischemic stroke rate was 12%. In the presence of progression (n = 77), it was 21% (average annual stroke rates of 1.5% and 2.6%, respectively; log-rank, P = .34). Only nine (30%) of the 30 strokes occurred in the progression group. CONCLUSIONS: Progressive asymptomatic carotid stenosis identified a subgroup with about twice the risk of ipsilateral stroke compared with those without progression. However, the clinical value of screening for progression simply for selecting patients for carotid procedures is limited because of the low frequency of progression and its relatively low associated stroke rate. The cost effectiveness of screening for change in stenosis severity to better direct current optimal medical treatment needs testing.

Extra-Cranial Carotid Artery Stenosis: An Objective Analysis of the Available Evidence.

Background and Purpose: Carotid stenosis is arterial disease narrowing of the origin of the internal carotid artery (main brain artery). Knowing how to best manage this is imperative because it is common in older people and an important cause of stroke. Inappropriately high expectations have grown regarding the value of carotid artery procedures, such as surgery (endarterectomy) and stenting, for lowering the stroke risk associated with carotid stenosis. Meanwhile, the improving and predominant value of medical intervention (lifestyle coaching and medication) continues to be underappreciated. Methods and Results: This article aims to be an objective presentation and discussion of the scientific literature critical for decision making when the primary goal is to optimize patient outcome. This compilation follows from many years of author scrutiny to separate fact from fiction. Common sense conclusions are drawn from factual statements backed by original citations. Detailed research methodology is given in cited papers. This article has been written in plain language given the importance of the general public understanding this topic. Issues covered include key terminology and the economic impact of carotid stenosis. There is a summary of the evidence-base regarding the efficacy and safety of procedural and medical (non-invasive) interventions for both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. Conclusions are drawn with respect to current best management and research priorities. Several "furphies" (misconceptions) are exposed that are commonly used to make carotid stenting and endarterectomy outcomes appear similar. Ongoing randomized trials are mentioned and why they are unlikely to identify a routine practice indication for carotid artery procedures. There is a discussion of relevant worldwide guidelines regarding carotid artery procedures, including how they should be improved. There is an outline of systematic changes that are resulting in better application of the evidence-base. Conclusion: The cornerstone of stroke prevention is medical intervention given it is non-invasive and protects against all arterial disease complications in all at risk. The "big" question is, does a carotid artery procedure add patient benefit in the modern era and, if so, for whom?

United States' teen dating violence policies: summary of policy element variation.

As teen dating violence (TDV) has gained attention as a public health concern across the United States (US), many efforts to mitigate TDV appear as policies in the 50 states in the form of for programming in K-12 schools. A keyword search identified 61 state-level school-based TDV policies. We developed an abstraction form to conduct a content analysis of these policies and generated descriptive statistics and graphic summaries. Thirty of the policies were original and 31 were additions or revisions of policies enacted by 17 of the 30 states previously. Of a possible score of 63, the minimum, mean, median, and maximum scores of currently active policies were 3.0, 17.7, 18.3, and 33.8, respectively. Results revealed considerable state-to-state variation in the presence and composition of school-based TDV policies. Opportunity for improving policies was universal, even among those with most favorably scores.

Asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis and cerebrovascular risk stratification.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the cerebrovascular risk stratification potential of baseline degree of stenosis, clinical features, and ultrasonic plaque characteristics in patients with asymptomatic internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, cohort study of patients undergoing medical intervention for vascular disease. Hazard ratios for ICA stenosis, clinical features, and plaque texture features associated with ipsilateral cerebrovascular or retinal ischemic (CORI) events were calculated using proportional hazards models. RESULTS: A total of 1121 patients with 50% to 99% asymptomatic ICA stenosis in relation to the bulb (European Carotid Surgery Trial [ECST] method) were followed-up for 6 to 96 months (mean, 48). A total of 130 ipsilateral CORI events occurred. Severity of stenosis, age, systolic blood pressure, increased serum creatinine, smoking history of more than 10 pack-years, history of contralateral transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) or stroke, low grayscale median (GSM), increased plaque area, plaque types 1, 2, and 3, and the presence of discrete white areas (DWAs) without acoustic shadowing were associated with increased risk. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for predicted risk versus observed CORI events as a measure of model validity. The areas under the ROC curves for a model of stenosis alone, a model of stenosis combined with clinical features and a model of stenosis combined with clinical, and plaque features were 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-0.64), 0.66 (0.62-0.72), and 0.82 (0.78-0.86), respectively. In the last model, stenosis, history of contralateral TIAs or stroke, GSM, plaque area, and DWAs were independent predictors of ipsilateral CORI events. Combinations of these could stratify patients into different levels of risk for ipsilateral CORI and stroke, with predicted risk close to observed risk. Of the 923 patients with ≥ 70% stenosis, the predicted cumulative 5-year stroke rate was <5% in 495, 5% to 9.9% in 202, 10% to 19.9% in 142, and ≥ 20% in 84 patients. CONCLUSION: Cerebrovascular risk stratification is possible using a combination of clinical and ultrasonic plaque features. These findings need to be validated in additional prospective studies of patients receiving optimal medical intervention alone.

Medical (nonsurgical) intervention alone is now best for prevention of stroke associated with asymptomatic severe carotid stenosis: results of a systematic review and analysis.

Significant advances in vascular disease medical intervention since large randomized trials for asymptomatic severe carotid stenosis were conducted (1983-2003) have prompted doubt over current expectations of a surgical benefit. In this systematic review and analysis of published data it was found that rates of ipsilateral and any-territory stroke (+/-TIA), with medical intervention alone, have fallen significantly since the mid-1980s, with recent estimates overlapping those of operated patients in randomized trials. However, current medical intervention alone was estimated at least 3 to 8 times more cost-effective. In conclusion, current vascular disease medical intervention alone is now best for stroke prevention associated with asymptomatic severe carotid stenosis given this new evidence, other cardiovascular benefits, and because high-risk patients who benefit from additional carotid surgery or angioplasty/stenting cannot be identified.