High diastolic flow velocities in severe internal carotid artery stenosis: a sign of increased surgical risk?
2000 (English)In: Journal of Vascular Surgery, ISSN 0741-5214, Vol. 31, no 3, 477-83 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
PURPOSE: We reviewed the history and preoperative investigations of patients with early postoperative neurologic events after carotid thromboendarterectomy in an attempt to identify risk factors for neurologic complications.
METHODS: Patients with neurologic events/complications (S group, n = 14 patients) were compared with an age- and disease-matched control group (C group, n = 42 patients) selected from the whole carotid thromboendarterectomy material between 1987 and 1996. In this retrospective study, we re-evaluated the maximum systolic and end diastolic flow velocities within the internal carotid artery (ICA) using video recordings of preoperative Duplex ultrasound scan investigations. The flow velocity variables were compared with preoperative carotid angiography and intraoperative ICA stump pressure measurement.
RESULTS: S-group did not differ from C-group concerning either cardiovascular risk factors or diseases, ipsilateral and contralateral angiographic grade of ICA stenosis, or history of cerebral infarctions. Nevertheless, in contrast to control subjects, patients with early postoperative major stroke had higher end diastolic flow velocities and lower ICA stump pressures. Patients with postoperative minor stroke, transient ischemic attack, or amaurosis fugax did not differ significantly from the control subjects. Among patients with ICA stenosis of 75% or more, end diastolic flow velocities were correlated to the diastolic stump pressures.
CONCLUSION: Diastolic flow velocities within severe internal carotid artery stenosis are dependent on the level of the collateral perfusion pressure distally to the stenosis (ie, high values indicate a low internal carotid artery stump pressure), which seems to be a risk factor for early postoperative strokes.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2000. Vol. 31, no 3, 477-83 p.
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-113409DOI: 10.1067/mva.2000.102058PubMedID: 10709060OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-113409DiVA: diva2:781765