Determinants of Cerebrovascular Reserve in Patients with Significant Carotid Stenosis
archie, j. p.
Show abstract
IntroductionIn patients with 70% to 99% diameter carotid artery stenosis cerebral blood flow reserve may be protective of future ischemic cerebral events. Reserve cerebral blood flow is created by brain auto-regulation. Both cerebral blood flow reserve and cerebrovascular reactivity can be measured non-invasively. However, the factors and variables that determine the availability and magnitude and of reserve blood flow remain poorly understood. The availability of reserve cerebral blood flow is a predictor of stroke risk. The aim of this study is to employ a hemodynamic model to predict the variables and functional relationships that determine cerebral blood flow reserve in patients with significant carotid stenosis. MethodsA basic one-dimensional, three-unit (carotid, collateral and brain) energy conservation fluid mechanics blood flow model is employed. It has two distinct but adjacent blood flow components with normal cerebral blood flow at the interface. In the brain auto-regulated blood flow component cerebral blood flow is maintained normal by reserve flow. In the brain pressure dependent blood flow component cerebral blood flow is below normal because cerebral perfusion pressure is below the lower threshold value for auto-regulation. Patient specific values of collateral vascular resistance are determined from a model solution using clinically measured systemic and carotid arterial stump pressures. Collateral vascular resistance curves illustrate the model solutions for reserve and actual cerebral blood flow as a function of percent diameter carotid artery stenosis and mean systemic arterial pressure. The threshold cerebral perfusion pressure value for auto-regulation is assumed to be 50 mmHg. Normal auto-regulated regional cerebral blood flow is assumed to be 50 ml/min/100g. Cerebral blood flow and reserve blood flow solutions are given for systemic arterial pressures of 80, 90, 100, 110 and 120 mmHg and for three patient specific collateral vascular resistance values, Rw = 1.0 (mean patient value), Rw = 0.5 (lower 1 SD) and Rd = 3.0 (upper 1 SD). ResultsReserve cerebral blood flow is only available when a patients cerebral perfusion pressure is in the normal auto-regulatory range. Both actual and reserve cerebral blood flows are primarily from the carotid circulation when carotid stenosis is less than 60% diameter. Between 60% and 75% stenosis the remaining carotid blood flow reserve is utilized and at higher degrees of stenosis all reserve flow is from the collateral circulation. The primary independent variables that determine actual and reserve cerebral blood flow are mean systemic arterial pressure, degree of carotid stenosis and patient specific collateral vascular resistance. Approximate 16% of patients have collateral vascular resistance greater than 5.0 and are predicted to be at high risk of cerebral ischemia or infarction with progression to severe carotid stenosis or occlusion. The approximate 50% of patients with a collateral vascular resistance less than 1.0 are predicted to have adequate cerebral blood flow with progression to carotid occlusion, and most maintain some reserve. Clinically measured values of cerebral blood flow reserve or cerebrovascular reactivity are predicted to be unreliable without consideration of systemic arterial pressure and degree of carotid stenosis. Reserve cerebral blood flow values measured in patients with only moderate 60% to 70% carotid stenosis are in general too high and variable to be of clinical value, but are most reliable when measured near 80% diameter stenosis and considered as percent of the maximum reserve blood flow. Patient specific measured reserve blood flow values can be inserted into the model to calculate the collateral vascular resistance. ConclusionsPredicting cerebral blood flow reserve in patients with significant carotid stenosis is complex and multifactorial. A simple cerebrovascular model predicts that patient specific collateral vascular resistance is an excellent predictor of reserve cerebral blood flow in patients with significant carotid stenosis. Cerebral blood flow reserve measurements are of limited value without accounting for systemic pressure and actual percent carotid stenosis. Asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis and a collateral vascular resistance greater than 1.0 are at increased risk of cerebral ischemia and may benefit from carotid endarterectomy.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Evidence And Mechanisms For Embolic Stroke In Contralateral Hemispheres From Carotid Artery Sources 95%
- iCPET calculator: a web-based application to standardize the calculation of alpha distensibility in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension 92%
- The ABCs of Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Blood Volume Measurement: A Simplified Quantitative Method Predicts Outcomes and Delayed Cerebral Ischemia. 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Endovascular structures of the basilar artery: forms of the basilar nonfusion spectrum 95%
- Calculating the optimal hematocrit under the constraint of constant cardiac power 93%
- Understanding Embolus Transport And Source To Destination Mapping Of Thromboemboli In Hemodynamics Driven By Left Ventricular Assist Device 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Sex Differences in Middle Cerebral Artery Reactivity and Hemodynamics Independent from Changes in Systemic Arterial Stiffness in Adult Sprague-Dawley Rats 94%
- Novel Application of a Force Sensor during Sit-to-Stands to Measure Dynamic Cerebral Autoregulation Onset 91%
- Prediction of plasma volume and total hemoglobin mass with machine learning 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Novel Method for Handling Pre-Existing Conditions in Prediction Models for Covid-19 Death 87%
- Multilevel predictors categorization for post-CABG atrial fibrillation prediction 87%
- Aspirin Use is Associated with Decreased Mortality in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis 86%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.