The DOI matches its Crossref record; 88 of the 88 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Contemporary carotid imaging: from degree of stenosis to plaque vulnerability
Abstract
Carotid artery stenosis is a well-established risk factor of ischemic stroke, contributing to up to 10%-20% of strokes or transient ischemic attacks. Many clinical trials over the last 20 years have used measurements of carotid artery stenosis as a means to risk stratify patients. However, with improvements in vascular imaging techniques such as CT angiography and MR angiography, ultrasonography, and PET/CT, it is now possible to risk stratify patients, not just on the degree of carotid artery stenosis but also on how vulnerable the plaque is to rupture, resulting in ischemic stroke. These imaging techniques are ushering in an emerging paradigm shift that allows for risk stratifications based on the presence of imaging features such as intraplaque hemorrhage (IPH), plaque ulceration, plaque neovascularity, fibrous cap thickness, and presence of a lipid-rich necrotic core (LRNC). It is important for the neurosurgeon to be aware of these new imaging techniques that allow for improved patient risk stratification and outcomes. For example, a patient with a low-grade stenosis but an ulcerated plaque may benefit more from a revascularization procedure than a patient with a stable 70% asymptomatic stenosis with a thick fibrous cap. This review summarizes the current state-of-the-art advances in carotid plaque imaging. Currently, MRI is the gold standard in carotid plaque imaging, with its high resolution and high sensitivity for identifying IPH, ulceration, LRNC, and inflammation. However, MRI is limited due to time constraints. CT also allows for high-resolution imaging and can accurately detect ulceration and calcification, but cannot reliably differentiate LRNC from IPH. PET/CT is an effective technique to identify active inflammation within the plaque, but it does not allow for assessment of anatomy, ulceration, IPH, or LRNC. Ultrasonography, with the aid of contrast enhancement, is a cost-effective technique to assess plaque morphology and characteristics, but it is limited in sensitivity and specificity for detecting LRNC, plaque hemorrhage, and ulceration compared with MRI. Also summarized is how these advanced imaging techniques are being used in clinical practice to risk stratify patients with low- and high-grade carotid artery stenosis. For example, identification of IPH on MRI in patients with low-grade carotid artery stenosis is a risk factor for failure of medical therapy, and studies have shown that such patients may fair better with carotid endarterectomy (CEA). MR plaque imaging has also been found to be useful in identifying revascularization candidates who would be better candidates for CEA than carotid artery stenting (CAS), as high intraplaque signal on time of flight imaging is associated with vulnerable plaque and increased rates of adverse events in patients undergoing CAS but not CEA.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Beneficial Effect of Carotid Endarterectomy in Symptomatic Patients with High-Grade Carotid Stenosis
(1991) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199108153250701 · Cited by 8,368
Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA)
Griswold, M. A., Jakob, P. M., Heidemann, R. M., Nittka, M., Jellus, V., Wang, J., Kiefer, B., & Haase, A. (2002) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.10171 · Cited by 5,303
Endarterectomy for Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis
Walker, M. D. (1995) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520420037035 · Cited by 4,403
Compensatory Enlargement of Human Atherosclerotic Coronary Arteries
Glagov, S., Weisenberg, E., Zarins, C. K., Stankunavicius, R., & Kolettis, G. J. (1987) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198705283162204 · Cited by 3,623
Benefit of Carotid Endarterectomy in Patients with Symptomatic Moderate or Severe Stenosis
Barnett, H. J. M., Taylor, D. W., Eliasziw, M., Fox, A. J., Ferguson, G. G., Haynes, R. B., Rankin, R. N., Clagett, G. P., Hachinski, V. C., Sackett, D. L., et al. (1998) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199811123392002 · Cited by 3,594
Stary, H. C., Chandler, A. B., Dinsmore, R. E., Fuster, V., Glagov, S., Insull, W., Rosenfeld, M. E., Schwartz, C. J., Wagner, W. D., & Wissler, R. W. (1995) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.92.5.1355 · Cited by 3,533
Efficacy of Carotid Endarterectomy for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis
Hobson, R. W., Weiss, D. G., Fields, W. S., Goldstone, J., Moore, W. S., Towne, J. B., & Wright, C. B. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199301283280401 · Cited by 1,407
Jonasson, L., Holm, J., Skalli, O., Bondjers, G., & Hansson, G. K. (1986) · Arteriosclerosis: An Official Journal of the American Heart Association, Inc. · doi:10.1161/01.atv.6.2.131 · Cited by 1,335
Cited by
Puz, P., & Lasek–Bal, A. (2017) · Atherosclerosis · doi:10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2017.06.008 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Brinjikji, W., Huston, J., Rabinstein, A. A., Kim, G.-M., Lerman, A., & Lanzino, G.
- Venue
- Journal of Neurosurgery
- Published
- 2016-01
- Volume
- 124
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 27-42
- ISSN
- 0022-3085 (ISSN-L)
- 1933-0693
- OpenAlex
- W2124902846
- Cited by
- 401
- References
- 88
- FWCI
- 13.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Contemporary carotid imaging: from degree of stenosis to plaque vulnerability. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3171/2015.1.jns142452
- The paper
- Brinjikji, W., Huston, J., Rabinstein, A. A., Kim, G.-M., Lerman, A., & Lanzino, G. (2016). Contemporary carotid imaging: from degree of stenosis to plaque vulnerability. Journal of Neurosurgery. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.1.jns142452
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.