Matthias Reinhard1, Guido Schwarzer2, Matthias Briel2, Claudia Altamura2, Paola Palazzo2, Alice King2, Natan M Bornstein2, Nils Petersen2, Edith Motschall2, Andreas Hetzel2, Randolph S Marshall2, Catharina J M Klijn2, Mauro Silvestrini2, Hugh S Markus2, Fabrizio Vernieri2. 1. From the Department of Neurology (M.R., A.H.) and the Institute of Medical Biometry and Statistics (G.S., E.M.), University of Freiburg, Germany; Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (M.B.), University Hospital Basel, Switzerland; the Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (M.B.), McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada; Neurology Unit (C.A., P.P., F.V.), Università Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, Italy; School of Public Health (A.K.), Imperial College London, UK; the Department of Neurology (N.M.B.), Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center and Tel Aviv University, Israel; Columbia University Medical Center (N.P., R.S.M.), Neurological Institute of New York; the Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery (C.J.M.K.), Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands; the Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine (M.S.), Marche Polytechnic University, Ancona, Italy; and Clinical Neurosciences (H.S.M.), University of Cambridge, UK. matthias.reinhard@uniklinik-freiburg.de. 2. From the Department of Neurology (M.R., A.H.) and the Institute of Medical Biometry and Statistics (G.S., E.M.), University of Freiburg, Germany; Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (M.B.), University Hospital Basel, Switzerland; the Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (M.B.), McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada; Neurology Unit (C.A., P.P., F.V.), Università Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, Italy; School of Public Health (A.K.), Imperial College London, UK; the Department of Neurology (N.M.B.), Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center and Tel Aviv University, Israel; Columbia University Medical Center (N.P., R.S.M.), Neurological Institute of New York; the Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery (C.J.M.K.), Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands; the Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine (M.S.), Marche Polytechnic University, Ancona, Italy; and Clinical Neurosciences (H.S.M.), University of Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the usefulness of transcranial Doppler CO2 reactivity (CO2R) for prediction of ipsilateral ischemic stroke in carotid artery stenosis and occlusion with a meta-analysis of prospective studies based on individual patient data. METHODS: We searched Medline, Biosis Previews, Science Citation Index, The Cochrane Library, and EMBASE for studies in which patients with severe carotid artery stenosis or occlusion underwent Doppler CO2R testing (inhalation of CO2 or breath-holding) and were prospectively followed for ipsilateral ischemic stroke. Individual data from 754 patients from 9 studies were included. We used percentage cerebral blood flow velocity increase (pCi) during hypercapnia as the primary CO2R measure, and defined impaired reactivity as pCi <20% increase. RESULTS: In a multiple regression model, impaired CO2R was independently associated with an increased risk of ipsilateral ischemic stroke (hazard ratio [HR] 3.69; confidence interval [CI] 2.01, 6.77; p < 0.0001). Risk prediction was similar for recently symptomatic vs asymptomatic patients. Using continuous values of pCi, a significant association between decreasing pCi and increasing risk of ipsilateral stroke was found: HR of 1.64 (95% CI 1.33, 2.02; p < 0.0001) per 10% decrease in pCi. For patients with asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis only (n = 330), a comparable stroke risk prediction was found: increasing HR 1.95 (95% CI 1.26, 3.04; p = 0.003) per 10% decrease in pCi. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis supports the usefulness of CO2R in risk prediction for patients with severe carotid artery stenosis or occlusion, both in recently symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Further studies should evaluate whether treatment strategies in asymptomatic patients based on CO2R could improve patient outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the usefulness of transcranial Doppler CO2 reactivity (CO2R) for prediction of ipsilateral ischemic stroke in carotid artery stenosis and occlusion with a meta-analysis of prospective studies based on individual patient data. METHODS: We searched Medline, Biosis Previews, Science Citation Index, The Cochrane Library, and EMBASE for studies in which patients with severe carotid artery stenosis or occlusion underwent Doppler CO2R testing (inhalation of CO2 or breath-holding) and were prospectively followed for ipsilateral ischemic stroke. Individual data from 754 patients from 9 studies were included. We used percentage cerebral blood flow velocity increase (pCi) during hypercapnia as the primary CO2R measure, and defined impaired reactivity as pCi <20% increase. RESULTS: In a multiple regression model, impaired CO2R was independently associated with an increased risk of ipsilateral ischemic stroke (hazard ratio [HR] 3.69; confidence interval [CI] 2.01, 6.77; p < 0.0001). Risk prediction was similar for recently symptomatic vs asymptomatic patients. Using continuous values of pCi, a significant association between decreasing pCi and increasing risk of ipsilateral stroke was found: HR of 1.64 (95% CI 1.33, 2.02; p < 0.0001) per 10% decrease in pCi. For patients with asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis only (n = 330), a comparable stroke risk prediction was found: increasing HR 1.95 (95% CI 1.26, 3.04; p = 0.003) per 10% decrease in pCi. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis supports the usefulness of CO2R in risk prediction for patients with severe carotid artery stenosis or occlusion, both in recently symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Further studies should evaluate whether treatment strategies in asymptomatic patients based on CO2R could improve patient outcomes.
Authors: F Vernieri; P Pasqualetti; M Matteis; F Passarelli; E Troisi; P M Rossini; C Caltagirone; M Silvestrini Journal: Stroke Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: M Silvestrini; F Vernieri; P Pasqualetti; M Matteis; F Passarelli; E Troisi; C Caltagirone Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-04-26 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Randolph S Marshall; Tanja Rundek; Douglas M Sproule; Brian-Fred M Fitzsimmons; Shauna Schwartz; Ronald M Lazar Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-03-06 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: L McKetton; L Venkatraghavan; C Rosen; D M Mandell; K Sam; O Sobczyk; J Poublanc; E Gray; A Crawley; J Duffin; J A Fisher; D J Mikulis Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-12-20 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Hesamoddin Jahanian; Thomas Christen; Michael E Moseley; Nicholas M Pajewski; Clinton B Wright; Manjula K Tamura; Greg Zaharchuk Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2016-01-01 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: N Dlamini; M Slim; F Kirkham; M Shroff; P Dirks; M Moharir; D MacGregor; A Robertson; G deVeber; W Logan Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-12-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Andreas Oldag; Jens Neumann; Michael Goertler; Hermann Hinrichs; Hans-Jochen Heinze; Andreas Kupsch; Catherine M Sweeney-Reed; Klaus Kopitzki Journal: J Neurol Date: 2016-08-20 Impact factor: 4.849