N F Fanning1, T D Walters, A J Fox, S P Symons. 1. Division of Neuroradiology, Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The association of cervical carotid artery bifurcation calcification to future stroke risk is unknown, though coronary artery calcification is a proven indicator of heart disease risk. Severity of white matter change has been correlated with future stroke risk. We sought to use white matter severity grade on CT as a surrogate predictor of relative future stroke risk and thus correlate white matter and future stroke risk with carotid calcification grade. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed unenhanced neck and brain CTs in 209 patients. Carotid calcification degree was scored by the Agatston method, adapted from that commonly used to quantify coronary artery calcification. White matter change severity was scored by the European Task Force for Age-Related White Matter Change scale. Both scores were measured blinded to each other, and to age and sex covariables. Association was tested by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Both carotid calcification and white matter scores were strongly, and independently, associated with increasing age (r = 0.61, P < .001; and r = 0.67, P < .001, respectively). Despite apparent association between carotid calcification and white matter scores on univariate analysis, there was no independent effect evident after adjusting for age as a covariant (r = 0.07, P = .14). Sex had no independent effect on white matter scores, though men had a marginally higher mean calcified carotid plaque load than women after controlling for age (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Carotid calcification scores do not independently predict severity of white matter ischemia. Future stroke risk, assessed by white matter severity scores, cannot be predicted from carotid calcium scores.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The association of cervical carotid artery bifurcation calcification to future stroke risk is unknown, though coronary artery calcification is a proven indicator of heart disease risk. Severity of white matter change has been correlated with future stroke risk. We sought to use white matter severity grade on CT as a surrogate predictor of relative future stroke risk and thus correlate white matter and future stroke risk with carotid calcification grade. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed unenhanced neck and brain CTs in 209 patients. Carotid calcification degree was scored by the Agatston method, adapted from that commonly used to quantify coronary artery calcification. White matter change severity was scored by the European Task Force for Age-Related White Matter Change scale. Both scores were measured blinded to each other, and to age and sex covariables. Association was tested by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Both carotid calcification and white matter scores were strongly, and independently, associated with increasing age (r = 0.61, P < .001; and r = 0.67, P < .001, respectively). Despite apparent association between carotid calcification and white matter scores on univariate analysis, there was no independent effect evident after adjusting for age as a covariant (r = 0.07, P = .14). Sex had no independent effect on white matter scores, though men had a marginally higher mean calcified carotid plaque load than women after controlling for age (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS:Carotid calcification scores do not independently predict severity of white matter ischemia. Future stroke risk, assessed by white matter severity scores, cannot be predicted from carotid calcium scores.
Authors: Kiran R Nandalur; Erol Baskurt; Klaus D Hagspiel; C Douglas Phillips; Christopher M Kramer Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: M M Breteler; J C van Swieten; M L Bots; D E Grobbee; J J Claus; J H van den Hout; F van Harskamp; H L Tanghe; P T de Jong; J van Gijn Journal: Neurology Date: 1994-07 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Sarah E Vermeer; Monika Hollander; Ewoud J van Dijk; Albert Hofman; Peter J Koudstaal; Monique M B Breteler Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-04-10 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Tom Jeerakathil; Philip A Wolf; Alexa Beiser; Joseph Massaro; Sudha Seshadri; Ralph B D'Agostino; Charles DeCarli Journal: Stroke Date: 2004-06-24 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: M Hollander; A E Hak; P J Koudstaal; M L Bots; D E Grobbee; A Hofman; J C M Witteman; M M B Breteler Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-09-04 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Wael E Shaalan; Hongwei Cheng; Bruce Gewertz; James F McKinsey; Lewis B Schwartz; Daniel Katz; Dindcai Cao; Tina Desai; Seymour Glagov; Hisham S Bassiouny Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: John S Ho; John J Cannaday; Carolyn E Barlow; Dale B Reinhardt; Wendy A Wade Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-11-20 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: H A Marquering; C B L M Majoie; L Smagge; A G Kurvers; H A Gratama van Andel; R van den Berg; P J Nederkoorn Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-06-09 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: L Saba; L Pascalis; R Sanfilippo; M Anzidei; R Bura; R Montisci; G Mallarini Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-02-24 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Nikola Gotovac; Ivana Išgum; Max A Viergever; Geert J Biessels; Josip Fajdić; Birgitta K Velthuis; Mathias Prokop Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-01-18 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: J Tamaki; M Iki; Y Hirano; Y Sato; E Kajita; S Kagamimori; Y Kagawa; H Yoneshima Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2008-05-22 Impact factor: 4.507