Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging 5/2012

01-06-2012 | Original Paper

Carotid stenosis evaluation by 64-slice CTA: comparison of NASCET, ECST and CC grading methods

Authors: Gülsüm Kılıçkap, Elif Ergun, Elif Başbay, Pınar Koşar, Uğur Kosar

Published in: The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging | Issue 5/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose is to evaluate the intraobserver and interobserver variability of the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET), European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST) and Common Carotid (CC) methods, which are used to measure the degree of ICA stenosis, using 64-slice CT angiography and to compare the measurements made by these three methods. 88 cases (111 carotid arteries) were included in the study. Carotid CTA was performed by a 64 slice scanner (Toshiba, Aqullion 64).Two radiologists measured the degree of carotid stenosis by using NASCET, ECST and CC methods. Intraobserver and interobserver variability of each method was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland–Altman plots and kappa and linear weighted kappa statistics. The relation between the measurements was assessed by correlation coefficient (with linear and quadratic methods). Correlation coefficients showed that there is linear correlation between the measurements made by the three methods. The degree of stenosis measured with the NASCET method had the lowest value, while the corresponding values measured with the ECST and CC methods were close to each other. ICC and Bland–Altman plots showed high intra and inter observer agreement for NASCET, ECST and CC methods whereas kappa statistics showed moderate to substantial agreement. CC method had slightly higher agreement when compared with the other two methods. Intra and interobserver agreement is high for NASCET, ECST and CC methods however CC method has a slightly higher reproducibility. There is linear correlation between the measurements made by the three methods.
Literature
1.
go back to reference North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators (1991) Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 325:445–453CrossRef North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators (1991) Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 325:445–453CrossRef
2.
go back to reference European Carotid Surgery Trialists’ Collaborative Group (1998) Randomised trial of endarterectomy for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis: final results of the MRC European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST). Lancet 351:1379–1387CrossRef European Carotid Surgery Trialists’ Collaborative Group (1998) Randomised trial of endarterectomy for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis: final results of the MRC European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST). Lancet 351:1379–1387CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Group (1995) Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. JAMA 273:1421–1428CrossRef Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Group (1995) Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. JAMA 273:1421–1428CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Jaff MR, Goldmakher GV, Lev MH, Romero JM (2008) Imaging of the carotid arteries: the role of duplex ultrasonography, magnetic resonance arteriography, and computerized tomographic arteriography. Vasc Med 13:281–292PubMedCrossRef Jaff MR, Goldmakher GV, Lev MH, Romero JM (2008) Imaging of the carotid arteries: the role of duplex ultrasonography, magnetic resonance arteriography, and computerized tomographic arteriography. Vasc Med 13:281–292PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Patel SG, Collie DA, Wardlaw JW, Lewis SC, Wright AR, Gibson RJ, Sellar RJ (2002) Outcome, observer reliability, and patient preferences ifCTA, MRA, or Doppler ultrasound were used, individually or together, instead of digital subtraction angiography before carotid endarterectomy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 73:21–28PubMedCrossRef Patel SG, Collie DA, Wardlaw JW, Lewis SC, Wright AR, Gibson RJ, Sellar RJ (2002) Outcome, observer reliability, and patient preferences ifCTA, MRA, or Doppler ultrasound were used, individually or together, instead of digital subtraction angiography before carotid endarterectomy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 73:21–28PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Saba L, Mallarini G (2008) MDCTA of carotid plaque degree of stenosis: evaluation of interobserver agreement. AJR 190:W41–W46PubMedCrossRef Saba L, Mallarini G (2008) MDCTA of carotid plaque degree of stenosis: evaluation of interobserver agreement. AJR 190:W41–W46PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Rothwell PM, Gibson RJ, Slattery J, Sellar RJ, Warlow CP (1994) Equivalence of measurements of carotid stenosis. A comparison of three methods on 1001 angiograms. European Carotid Surgery Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Stroke 25:2435–2439PubMedCrossRef Rothwell PM, Gibson RJ, Slattery J, Sellar RJ, Warlow CP (1994) Equivalence of measurements of carotid stenosis. A comparison of three methods on 1001 angiograms. European Carotid Surgery Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Stroke 25:2435–2439PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Rothwell PM, Warlow CP (1993) The European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST). In: Greenhalgh RM, Hollier LH (eds) Surgery for stroke. WB Saunders, London Rothwell PM, Warlow CP (1993) The European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST). In: Greenhalgh RM, Hollier LH (eds) Surgery for stroke. WB Saunders, London
9.
go back to reference Eliasziw M, Smith RF, Singh N, Holdsworth DW, Fox AJ, Barnett HJ (1994) Further comments on the measurement of carotid stenosis from angiograms. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) Group. Stroke 25:2445–2449PubMedCrossRef Eliasziw M, Smith RF, Singh N, Holdsworth DW, Fox AJ, Barnett HJ (1994) Further comments on the measurement of carotid stenosis from angiograms. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) Group. Stroke 25:2445–2449PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Saba L, Mallarini G (2010) A comparison between NASCET and ECST methods in the study of carotids evaluation using multi-detector-row CT angiography. Eur J Radiol 76:42–47PubMedCrossRef Saba L, Mallarini G (2010) A comparison between NASCET and ECST methods in the study of carotids evaluation using multi-detector-row CT angiography. Eur J Radiol 76:42–47PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Staikov IN, Arnold M, Mattle H, Remonda L, Sturzenegger M, Baumgartner RW et al (2000) Comparison of the ECST, CC, and NASCET grading methods and ultrasound for assessing carotid stenosis. J Neurol 247:681–686PubMedCrossRef Staikov IN, Arnold M, Mattle H, Remonda L, Sturzenegger M, Baumgartner RW et al (2000) Comparison of the ECST, CC, and NASCET grading methods and ultrasound for assessing carotid stenosis. J Neurol 247:681–686PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Rothwell PM, Gutnikov A,WarlowCP, European Carotid Surgery Trialists Collaborator (2003) Reanalysis of the final results of the European carotid surgery trial. Stroke 34:514–23 Rothwell PM, Gutnikov A,WarlowCP, European Carotid Surgery Trialists Collaborator (2003) Reanalysis of the final results of the European carotid surgery trial. Stroke 34:514–23
13.
go back to reference Rothwell PM, Gibson RJ, Slattery J, Warlow CP (1994) Prognostic value and reproducibility of measurements of carotid stenosis. A comparison of three methods on 1001 angiograms. European Carotid SurgeryTrialists’ Collaborative Group. Stroke 25:2440–2444PubMedCrossRef Rothwell PM, Gibson RJ, Slattery J, Warlow CP (1994) Prognostic value and reproducibility of measurements of carotid stenosis. A comparison of three methods on 1001 angiograms. European Carotid SurgeryTrialists’ Collaborative Group. Stroke 25:2440–2444PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Gagne PJ, Matchett J, MacFarland D, Hauer-Jensen M, Barone GW, Eidt JF et al (1996) Can the NASCET technique for measuring carotid stenosis be reliably appliedoutside the trial? J Vasc Surg 24:339–356CrossRef Gagne PJ, Matchett J, MacFarland D, Hauer-Jensen M, Barone GW, Eidt JF et al (1996) Can the NASCET technique for measuring carotid stenosis be reliably appliedoutside the trial? J Vasc Surg 24:339–356CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Vanninen R, Manninen H, Kovisto K, Tulla H, Partanen K, Puranen M (1994) Carotid Stenosis by digital subtraction angiography: reproducibility of the European carotid surgery trial and the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial measurement methods and visual interpretation. Am J Neuroradiol 15:1635–1641PubMed Vanninen R, Manninen H, Kovisto K, Tulla H, Partanen K, Puranen M (1994) Carotid Stenosis by digital subtraction angiography: reproducibility of the European carotid surgery trial and the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial measurement methods and visual interpretation. Am J Neuroradiol 15:1635–1641PubMed
16.
go back to reference Rothwell PM, Warlow CP (1995) Making sense of measurement of carotid stenosis of carotid stenosis. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 5:83–87CrossRef Rothwell PM, Warlow CP (1995) Making sense of measurement of carotid stenosis of carotid stenosis. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 5:83–87CrossRef
17.
go back to reference U-King-Im JM, Trivedi RA, Cross JJ, Higgins NJ, Hollingworth W, Graves M et al (2004) Measuring carotid stenosis on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography: diagnostic performance and reproducibility of 3 different methods. Stroke 35:2083–2088PubMedCrossRef U-King-Im JM, Trivedi RA, Cross JJ, Higgins NJ, Hollingworth W, Graves M et al (2004) Measuring carotid stenosis on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography: diagnostic performance and reproducibility of 3 different methods. Stroke 35:2083–2088PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Carotid stenosis evaluation by 64-slice CTA: comparison of NASCET, ECST and CC grading methods
Authors
Gülsüm Kılıçkap
Elif Ergun
Elif Başbay
Pınar Koşar
Uğur Kosar
Publication date
01-06-2012
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging / Issue 5/2012
Print ISSN: 1569-5794
Electronic ISSN: 1875-8312
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-011-9939-6

Other articles of this Issue 5/2012

The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging 5/2012 Go to the issue