Abstract
Objective To validate the carotid web (CW) risk stratification assessment described in our previous work with a larger cohort of patients with incidentally found asymptomatic CWs.
Methods A retrospective analysis of our electronic medical record database identified all patients with a diagnosis of CW from 2017-2024 at our institution. We included symptomatic patients and those with asymptomatic carotid webs, meaning patients with incidentally found webs and no history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Patient charts were reviewed for demographics, imaging, comorbidities, hospital course, and incidence of stroke after diagnosis of an asymptomatic carotid web. All angles were measured as described in our previous work on a sagittal reconstruction of CTA imaging of the neck in which the common carotid artery (CCA), external carotid artery (ECA), and ICA could be well visualized, along with the CW itself. A standard logistic regression was performed to evaluate the association between the number of high-risk angles and stroke risk.
Results 26 asymptomatic and nine symptomatic patients were identified. Patients were categorized as having 0, 1, or 2+ high-risk angle values. Patients with more high-risk angles had a markedly higher risk of stroke (OR = 5.91, 95% CI: [4.25, 8.24]). The probability of stroke increased with the number of high-risk angles: patients with 2+ high-risk angles (83.4%) had the highest stroke probability compared to those with 0 (2.8%) or 1 (27.7%) high-risk angles. In the asymptomatic cohort, mean angles all fell below the high-risk threshold values. In the symptomatic cohort, mean angles were above the high-risk threshold values, whereas the mean CPT (53.6°) angle fell below the cut-off value for designation as a high-risk angle.
Conclusions Given the successful stratification of CWs into high and low-risk groups in this study, the utilization of geometric CW parameters may play a crucial role in improvement of patient selection for intervention in patients with an incidental diagnosis of CW.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No funding was received for this study.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was granted by the NYU Langone Health IRB (s22-00111)
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data are not publicly available to preserve patient confidentiality and due to institutional data sharing policies. However, the data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request and with appropriate institutional approvals.???
