Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

AJNR Awards, New Junior Editors, and more. Read the latest AJNR updates

Research ArticleNEUROVASCULAR/STROKE IMAGING

Diagnostic Accuracy of Preoperative Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping for Detecting Histologic Intraplaque Hemorrhage in Cervical ICA Stenosis in Patients Undergoing Carotid Endarterectomy

Daisuke Oomori, Yosuke Akamatsu, Ikuko Uwano, Futoshi Mori, Tsuyoshi Matsuda, Ryo Sugimoto, Michiko Suzuki, Shunrou Fujiwara, Masakazu Kobayashi, Makoto Sasaki, Kunihiro Yoshioka, Naoki Yanagawa and Kuniaki Ogasawara
American Journal of Neuroradiology September 2024, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A8356
Daisuke Oomori
aFrom the Department of Neurosurgery (D.O., Y.A., S.F., M.K., K.O.), Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yosuke Akamatsu
aFrom the Department of Neurosurgery (D.O., Y.A., S.F., M.K., K.O.), Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Yosuke Akamatsu
Ikuko Uwano
dDivision of Ultrahigh Field MRI (I.U., F.M., T.M., M. Suzuki), Institute for Biomedical Sciences, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ikuko Uwano
Futoshi Mori
dDivision of Ultrahigh Field MRI (I.U., F.M., T.M., M. Suzuki), Institute for Biomedical Sciences, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Futoshi Mori
Tsuyoshi Matsuda
dDivision of Ultrahigh Field MRI (I.U., F.M., T.M., M. Suzuki), Institute for Biomedical Sciences, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Tsuyoshi Matsuda
Ryo Sugimoto
bDepartment of Molecular Diagnostic Pathology (R.S., N.Y.), Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michiko Suzuki
dDivision of Ultrahigh Field MRI (I.U., F.M., T.M., M. Suzuki), Institute for Biomedical Sciences, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shunrou Fujiwara
aFrom the Department of Neurosurgery (D.O., Y.A., S.F., M.K., K.O.), Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Shunrou Fujiwara
Masakazu Kobayashi
aFrom the Department of Neurosurgery (D.O., Y.A., S.F., M.K., K.O.), Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Masakazu Kobayashi
Makoto Sasaki
cDepartment of Radiology (M.S, K.Y), Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Makoto Sasaki
Kunihiro Yoshioka
cDepartment of Radiology (M.S, K.Y), Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kunihiro Yoshioka
Naoki Yanagawa
bDepartment of Molecular Diagnostic Pathology (R.S., N.Y.), Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Naoki Yanagawa
Kuniaki Ogasawara
aFrom the Department of Neurosurgery (D.O., Y.A., S.F., M.K., K.O.), Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Yahaba-cho, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kuniaki Ogasawara
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Quantitative susceptibility mapping has been proposed to assess intraplaque hemorrhage (IPH) in the carotid artery. The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative quantitative susceptibility mapping with that of the conventional T1-weighed 3D-FSE sequence for detecting IPH in cervical ICA stenosis in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy by using histology as the reference standard.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Carotid T1-weighted 3D-FSE and QSM images were obtained from 16 patients with cervical ICA stenosis before carotid endarterectomy. Relative signal intensity and susceptibility of the ICA were measured on 3 axial images, including the location of most severe stenosis on T1-weighted 3D-FSE and quantitative susceptibility mapping images, respectively. Three transverse sections of carotid plaques excised by carotid endarterectomy, which corresponded with images on MR imaging, were stained with H&E, antibody against glycophorin A, and Prussian blue, and the relative area of histologic IPH was calculated.

RESULTS: The correlation coefficient was significantly greater between susceptibility and relative area-histologic IPH (ρ = 0.691) than between relative signal intensity and relative area-histologic IPH (ρ = 0.413; P = .0259). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for detecting histologic sections consisting primarily of IPH (relative area-histologic IPH > 40.7%) tended to be greater for susceptibility (0.964) than for T1WI FSE-relative signal intensity (0.811). Marginal homogeneity was observed between susceptibility and histologic sections consisting primarily of IPH (P = .0412), but not between T1-weighted FSE-relative signal intensity and histologic sections consisting primarily of IPH (P = .1824).

CONCLUSIONS: Pre-carotid endarterectomy quantitative susceptibility mapping detects histologic IPH in cervical ICA stenosis more accurately than preoperative T1-weighted 3D-FSE imaging.

ABBREVIATIONS:

CEA
carotid endarterectomy
IPH
intraplaque hemorrhage
QSM
quantitative susceptibility mapping
RA
relative area
ROC
receiver operating characteristic
RSI
relative signal intensity

SUMMARY

PREVIOUS LITERATURE:

Vulnerable atherosclerotic plaques, including intraplaque hemorrhage (IPH) in the carotid artery, are related to subsequent or recurrent cerebrovascular ischemic events. Identification of IPH also may allow stratification of the risks of intraprocedural ischemic events in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or stent placement. Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) produced from the T2*-weighted magnitude/phase has been used to assess the presence of hemorrhage, iron, and calcification in the brain. A recent ex vivo study showed that QSM for carotid plaque excised by CEA can quantify the degree of histologic intraplaque hemorrhage and iron deposition.

KEY FINDINGS:

The correlation coefficient was significantly greater between susceptibility of carotid plaque on pre-CEA QSM and relative area (RA) of histologic IPH (ρ = 0.691) in excised carotid plaque than between relative signal intensity of carotid plaque on preoperative T1-weighted 3D-FSE imaging and RA-histologic IPH (ρ = 0.413; P = .0259).

KNOWLEDGE ADVANCEMENT:

Pre-CEA QSM detects histologic IPH in carotid artery stenosis more accurately than preoperative T1-weighted 3D-FSE imaging, suggesting that the former may allow more accurate stratification of the risk of further ischemic events for carotid stenosis as well as the risk of embolic events during surgical interventions than the latter imaging.

Vulnerable atherosclerotic plaques in the carotid artery are related to subsequent or recurrent cerebrovascular ischemic events1 and often contain intraplaque hemorrhage (IPH).1,2 For patients with symptomatic and severe stenosis of the cervical ICA, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stent placement can effectively prevent further stroke.3,-,5 Identification of IPH in carotid plaques is reportedly useful for specifying revascularization candidates who would be better candidates for CEA than for carotid artery stent placement, as carotid plaques consisting primarily of IPH are associated with increased rates of adverse events, such as intraoperative procedure-related cerebral infarction among patients undergoing carotid artery stent placement, but not CEA.6 In terms of CEA, the intraoperative development of emboli is also strongly associated with vulnerable carotid plaques primarily comprising IPH.7,8 In such situations, early clamping of the common and external carotid arteries before exposure of the ICA with fragile plaque consisting primarily of IPH prevents the development of new postoperative ischemic events due to embolism.9 In terms of carotid artery stent placement for vulnerable carotid plaques consisting primarily of IPH, balloon occlusion of the common and external carotid arteries as compared with filter protection for the ICA distal to the stenotic lesion reduces the risk of cerebral embolism.10,11 Identification of IPH may thus allow stratification of the risks of intraprocedural ischemic events in patients undergoing CEA or carotid artery stent placement.

IPH is generally assessed by using MR imaging based on T1-weighted sequences, such as cardiac-gated black-blood FSE, MPRAGE, 3D TOF-MRA, and 3D-FSE, because these sequences exploit the T1-shortening induced by the presence of methemoglobin.1,7,12,-,15 However, old chronic IPH may contain iron-rich hemosiderin, which can cause IPH to appear hypointense on T1-weighted images due to strong intravoxel signal dephasing, potentially leading to misdetection of IPH. In addition, the disadvantage of this MR plaque imaging includes displaying only methemoglobin as high signal intensity16 and the need for reference tissue, such as surrounding muscles.

Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) is a postprocessing technique for quantifying magnetic susceptibility from the T2*-weighted magnitude/phase, which is easily obtained by commercial scanners.17 This technique has been used to assess the presence of hemorrhage, iron, and calcification in the brain.18,-,20 A recent ex vivo study showed that QSM for carotid plaque excised by CEA can quantify the degree of histologic intraplaque hemorrhage and iron deposition.21 On the other hand, comparisons between data from preoperative carotid QSM and histologic findings from excised carotid plaque in patients undergoing CEA have been reported only on a preliminary basis.22,23

Given this background, the purpose of the present study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative QSM for detecting histologic intraplaque hemorrhage in cervical ICA stenosis by way of comparison with findings from preoperative T1-weighted 3D-FSE imaging in patients undergoing CEA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The protocol for the present prospective observational study was reviewed and approved by our institutional ethics committee. Written, informed consent was obtained from all participants or their next of kin before the study began.

Patients

Patients who underwent CEA at our hospital and met the following inclusion criteria were prospectively enrolled: 1) symptomatic (ischemic episodes present ≥2 weeks and <6 months before the patient visited our institution) ipsilateral ICA stenosis ≥70% or asymptomatic ipsilateral ICA stenosis ≥80%, as defined by the NASCET in association with DSA via arterial catheterization, and 2) a mRS score of 0–2 before surgery. Patients who satisfy the above criteria usually undergo CEA rather than carotid artery stent placement at our institute.

MR Plaque Imaging and Data Processing

MR imaging for cervical ICA stenosis was performed by using a 3T MR imaging scanner (Signa Architect, GE Healthcare) with a 19-channel head neck coil within 7 days before surgery. First, carotid plaque imaging was obtained by using a sagittal T1-weighted 3D-FSE sequence with variable flip angle and the following scan parameters: TR, 500 ms; TE, 10 ms; echo-train length, 14; FOV, 256 × 256 mm2; acquisition matrix size, 224 × 224; image matrix size, 512 × 512; section thickness, 1.4 mm; voxel size after zero-fill interpolation, 0.5 × 0.5 × 0.7 mm3; scan time, 1 minute 59 seconds. The location of most severe stenosis in the ICA ipsilateral to the scheduled CEA was visually determined on T1-weighted 3D-FSE images.

Subsequently, source data of carotid plaque imaging for QSM were also obtained with a 3D radiofrequency–spoiled gradient-echo sequence by using the same 3T MR imaging scanner; the parameters except TE and matrix were as follows: TR, 56 ms; flip angle, 15°; FOV, 200 × 200 mm2; section thickness, 1.0 mm; and parallel imaging factor, 1.5. Imaging covered from 20 mm proximal to 20 mm distal from the location of most severe stenosis as determined on T1-weighted 3D-FSE images. Eight patients were preliminarily scanned to determine optimal TEs (3.1/6.1/9.0/12.0/15.0/17.9 ms), number of excitations (1), and acquisition matrix size (200 × 200) (Online Supplemental Data). Final voxel size and scan time were 0.39 × 0.39 × 0.5 mm3 after zero-fill interpolation and 3 minutes and 59 seconds, respectively. QSM images were generated from magnitude and phase images of all TEs through the following reconstruction techniques. First, region-growing phase unwrapping and phase averaging with magnitude weighting were performed on phase images. Regularization-enabled sophisticated harmonic artifact reduction for phase data was then performed as a background field removal.24 For dipole inversion, least-squares estimation with adaptive edge-preserving filtering was used.25 We implemented in-house codes (Fujifilm Healthcare) to semiautomatically calculate final QSM images for objectively obtaining all images by using SPM12 (https://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/) and Matlab (MathWorks). The implemented codes are not publicly available, but the present procedures were undertaken in accordance with descriptions in previous studies.26,27

In addition to a reformatted axial image at the location of most severe stenosis in the ICA, reformatted axial images at 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal from the location of most severe stenosis were also generated on T1-weighted 3D-FSE images. One examiner (D.O.) blinded to patient information manually traced the circumference of the ICA and adjacent sternomastoid muscle on these 3 reformatted axial images for each patient (Figs 1 and 2).

FIG 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG 1.

Preoperative reformatted axial MR images with the location of most severe stenosis in the right cervical ICA and histologic transverse sections of carotid plaques excised by carotid endarterectomy from a 61-year-old man with minor strokes complicated by left-sided hemiparesis. A, Whereas signal intensity of the plaque in the right cervical ICA (gray circle) appears equal to that of the sternocleidomastoid muscle (white asterisk) on T1-weighted 3D-FSE image (upper image), its susceptibility (gray circle) is obviously high when compared with that of the background on quantitative susceptibility mapping (lower image). B, Left, middle, and right images represent histologic sections stained with H&E, antibody against glycophorin A, and Prussian blue, respectively. The circumference of the whole plaque is traced with a black line on a histologic section stained with H&E (left image). Areas positive for antibody against glycophorin A (middle image) and Prussian-blue staining (right image) are also traced with red and yellow lines, respectively. Each black asterisk indicates a true lumen of the ICA.

FIG 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG 2.

Preoperative reformatted axial MR images with the location of most severe stenosis in the right cervical ICA and histologic transverse sections of carotid plaques excised by carotid endarterectomy for a 77-year-old man with minor strokes complicated by left-sided hemiparesis. A, Signal intensity of the plaque in the right cervical ICA (white circle) appears equal to that of the sternocleidomastoid muscle (white asterisk) on T1-weighted 3D-FSE image (upper image). Its susceptibility (gray circle) also appears equal to or lower than that of the background on quantitative susceptibility mapping (lower image). B, Left, middle, and right images represent histologic sections stained with H&E, antibody against glycophorin A, and Prussian blue, respectively. No areas positive for antibody against glycophorin A are observed (middle image). The circumference of the whole plaque is traced as a yellow line on a histologic section stained with H&E (left image). Areas positive for Prussian-blue staining are also traced with black lines (right image). Each black asterisk indicates a true lumen of the ICA.

When tracing the circumference of the ICA, the true lumen was included. Signal intensities of the ICA and adjacent sternomastoid muscle were measured on each reformatted axial image by using OsiriX MD (Pixmeo). Images were randomized, and the ICA and muscle were traced 3 times on each reformatted axial image. The resulting signal intensity values were averaged, then the average signal intensity of the ICA was divided by that of the muscle on each reformatted axial image. This value was defined as the T1-weighted, FSE-relative signal intensity (RSI).

Three reformatted axial images from T1-weighted 3D-FSE images were automatically transferred to QSM, and 3 ROIs on the ICA traced on T1-weighted 3D-FSE images were automatically superimposed on QSM for each patient. The susceptibility value was measured in each ROI of the ICA (Figs 1 and 2).

Intraoperative Management and Histologic Analysis for Carotid Plaque

CEA was performed under general anesthesia. Intraoperative transcranial Doppler monitoring (EME Pioneer TC2020 system, Nicolet Vascular) was performed for insonation of the middle cerebral artery ipsilateral to the carotid artery undergoing CEA.12 When microembolic signals were observed on transcranial Doppler during exposure of the carotid arteries, early clamping of the common and external carotid arteries was performed.9 Based on the results of intraoperative electroencephalography with a 12-channel montage, some patients received placement of an intraluminal shunt.28

Carotid plaque was excised en bloc without cutting into the plaque and was fixed in 10% neutral-buffered formalin solution. The location of most severe stenosis determined on T1-weighted 3D-FSE images was visually identified on the exterior of the specimen by comparing the shape on T1-weighted 3D-FSE images with that of the specimen. Locations 5 mm proximal and 5 mm distal from the location of most severe stenosis were also determined on the exterior of the specimen. Next, the specimen was embedded in paraffin and transverse 3-µm-thick sections of the specimen were carefully cut in the above-mentioned 3 locations. These 3 transverse sections in each plaque were stained with H&E, antibody against glycophorin A, sialoglycoprotein on the erythrocyte membrane to detect erythrocytes, and Prussian blue to visualize ferric iron (Fe3+) to identify hemosiderin deposits indicative of chronic hemorrhage. Stained sections of the specimen were transferred to a virtual slide system (Aperio Digital Pathology, Leica Biosystems), and all subsequent procedures were performed on this system.

One pathologist (R.S.) blinded to patient information manually traced the circumference of the whole plaque on a histologic section stained with H&E and automatically quantified the area of the whole plaque by using image analysis software (Aperio ImageScope, Leica Biosystems) (Figs 1 and 2). When tracing the circumference of the whole plaque, the true lumen was included (Figs 1 and 2). The same pathologist also manually traced the circumferences of areas positive for Prussian blue or antibody against glycophorin A, respectively, and quantified these areas in the same fashion (Figs 1 and 2). In addition, in the same histologic section, circumferences of areas positive for both Prussian blue and antibody against glycophorin A were manually traced and the areas were automatically quantified. Finally, in each histologic section, the relative area of histologic IPH (RA-histologic IPH) (%) was calculated as follows: 100 × (areas positive for Prussian blue plus areas positive for antibody against glycophorin A minus areas positive for both)/area of the whole plaque. Any histologic section showing RA-histologic IPH >40.7% was defined as plaque consisting primarily of IPH.12

RESULTS

A total of 24 patients were included in the present study: 8 patients served to determine optimal parameters for preoperative QSM plaque imaging of cervical ICA, and the remaining 16 patients underwent preoperative QSM plaque imaging by using optimally determined parameters and histologic analysis of the excised carotid plaque.

These 16 men had a mean age of 72 ± 6 years (range, 61–80 years). Twelve patients had ipsilateral carotid territory symptoms, and 4 had asymptomatic ICA stenosis. Mean ICA stenosis was 89% ± 8% (range, 75%–95%). Three reformatted axial images including the locations of most severe stenosis and 5 mm proximal and distal from the location of most severe stenosis were obtained from T1-weighted 3D-FSE images and QSM in all 16 patients. Three histologic sections corresponding to reformatted axial images on T1-weighted 3D-FSE were obtained from 15 patients. In the remaining patient, the distance between the location of most severe stenosis and the distal end of the plaque was 3 mm, so only 2 histologic sections (the location of most severe stenosis and 5 mm proximal to the location of most severe stenosis) were obtained. Forty-seven reformatted axial images and histologic sections were thus analyzed.

A significant positive correlation was observed between RA-histologic IPH and T1WI FSE-RSI (ρ = 0.413; P = .0052) or susceptibility (ρ = 0.691; P < .0001) for the 47 images and sections (Fig 3).

FIG 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG 3.

Comparisons of RA-histologic IPH and T1-weighted FSE-RSI (left graph) or susceptibility on quantitative susceptibility mapping (right graph) for each histologic section and each MR image. Each vertical dotted line denotes the cutoff point for indicating a histologic section consisting primarily of IPH (40.7% for RA-histologic IPH), and each horizontal dotted line denotes the cutoff point lying closest to the upper left corner of the receiver operating characteristic curve for detecting a histologic section consisting primarily of IPH (1.90 for T1-weighted FSE-RSI, 115.7 for susceptibility).

The latter coefficient was significantly greater than the former (P = .0259). Because ranges of values differed considerably among the 3 groups (0–53.6 for RA-histologic IPH; 0.63–2.56 for T1-weighted FSE-RSI; −302.5–365.4 for susceptibility), each value was standardized by using the following formula: (a value minus mean of the referenced group)/standard deviation of the referenced group. Bland-Altman analysis was performed by using these standardized values (Online Supplemental Data). No constant bias was detected for RA-histologic IPH and T1-weighted FSE-RSI (95% CI of difference, −2.10–2.10) or susceptibility (95% CI of difference, −1.46–1.46). Further, no proportional bias was identified for RA-histologic IPH and T1-weighted FSE-RSI (slope-of-regression equation, 0.04) or susceptibility (slope-of-regression equation, −0.04). Generalized linear mixed-effects models with a subject random intercept revealed a significant relationship between RA-histologic IPH and T1-weighted FSE-RSI (P < .05) or susceptibility (P < .05).

Of the 47 histologic sections analyzed, 7 (15%) were determined to show plaque consisting primarily of IPH. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for histologic sections consisting primarily of IPH tended to be greater for susceptibility (0.964; 95% CI, 0.910–1.000) than for T1-weighted FSE-RSI (0.811; 95% CI, 0.607–1.000), although areas did not differ significantly between the two (difference between areas, 0.154; P = .0820) (Fig 4).

FIG 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG 4.

Receiver operating characteristic curves used to compare the accuracy of T1WI FSE-RSI and susceptibility for detecting a histologic section consisting primarily of IPH. Areas under the curves tend to be greater for susceptibility (solid line) than for T1-weighted FSE-RSI (dotted line), although pair-wise comparison analysis shows no significant difference between the two.

Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the cutoff point lying closest to the upper left corner of the ROC curve for the detection of histologic sections consisting primarily of IPH were 71%, 83%, 42%, and 94%, respectively, for T1-weighted FSE-RSI (cutoff, 1.90) and 100%, 85%, 54%, and 100%, respectively, for susceptibility (cutoff, 115.7 ppb). Marginal homogeneity was observed between histologic sections consisting primarily of IPH and susceptibility (P = .0412), but not between histologic sections consisting primarily of IPH and T1-weighted FSE-RSI (P = .1824).

DISCUSSION

The results of this study demonstrated that pre-CEA QSM can detect histologic intraplaque hemorrhage in cervical ICA stenosis more accurately than preoperative T1-weighted FSE imaging among patients undergoing CEA.

Five distinct stages of hemorrhage can be defined: hyperacute (intracellular oxyhemoglobin); acute (intracellular deoxyhemoglobin); early subacute (intracellular methemoglobin); late subacute (extracellular methemoglobin); and chronic (ferritin and hemosiderin).16 The short T1 of methemoglobin is due to the paramagnetic dipole-dipole interaction, and MR imaging based on T1-weighted sequences such as T1-weighted FSE displays only methemoglobin before and after red cell lysis as high signal intensity.16 The magnetic susceptibility effect is responsible for the short T2 observed when deoxyhemoglobin, methemoglobin, or hemosiderin exists intra- or extracellularly.16 This T2 shortening due to magnetic susceptibility effects is enhanced on higher-field-strength systems and on the gradient-echo images used in the present study.16 QSM is thus theoretically superior to T1-weighted FSE on 3T MR imaging for detecting IPH that may comprise oxyhemoglobin, deoxyhemoglobin, methemoglobin, and/or hemosiderin. Our results were compatible with this hypothesis. On the other hand, antibody against glycophorin A staining is used to detect the erythrocyte membrane rather than iron, suggesting that antibody against glycophorin A staining may reflect oxyhemoglobin, deoxyhemoglobin, and methemoglobin before red cell lysis. Prussian-blue staining visualizes only hemosiderin deposits. Even a combination of these 2 stains may not reflect extracellular methemoglobin. Differences among staining by these methods represented the most serious limitations in the present study. Whereas Wang et al23 also showed a significant correlation between QSM-detected and histologic IPH areas in patients with carotid stenosis, IPH areas detected by QSM and T1-weighted FSE showed good agreement between the 2 methods (Online Supplemental Data). Differences between the latter results and our data may be attributable to methodologic differences, such as determination of the presence and area of IPH on QSM or T1-weighted FSE.

A previous study compared the development of transcranial Doppler-based microembolic signals during exposure of the carotid arteries in carotid endarterectomy with the percentage area of IPH in the carotid plaque and showed that the cutoff point lying closest to the left upper corner of the ROC curve for the percentage area of IPH in predicting the development of microembolic signals was 40.7%.12 Based on that finding, we defined histologic sections showing RA-histologic IPH >40.7% as consisting primarily of IPH. Based on this, the sensitivity and specificity for predicting carotid plaque consisting primarily of IPH were significantly greater for QSM than for T1-weighted FSE, and both the sensitivity and negative predictive value of QSM for such predictions were 100%. These data suggested that carotid plaque imaging by using QSM may allow more accurate stratification of the risk of further ischemic events for patients with cervical carotid stenosis, as well as the risk of embolic events during surgical interventions for cervical carotid stenosis, than imaging by using T1-weighted FSE. Based on these data, we propose the following practical clinical algorithm for determining whether carotid artery stent placement or CEA is indicated: when susceptibility on the stenotic lesion of the affected carotid artery exceeds the cutoff (115.7 ppb), the stenotic lesion is determined to consist primarily of IPH and, in principle, CEA is recommended over carotid artery stent placement. In CEA for such lesions, early clamping of the common and external carotid arteries before exposure of the ICA is recommended. When carotid artery stent placement is applied for such lesions, balloon occlusion of the common and external carotid arteries rather than filter protection for the ICA distal to the stenotic lesion is recommended.

QSM clearly displays hemorrhage, iron, and calcification but does not depict other tissues.18⇓–20 For this reason, carotid plaque cannot always be identified on QSM alone. In the present study, the location of carotid plaque was visually identified on T1-weighted 3D-FSE images and QSM of the identified carotid plaques was performed. An additional scan time of 2 minutes (total scan time, 6 minutes) is thus needed for the detection of IPH in cervical ICA stenosis by using QSM.

In addition to the limitations already listed above, some other issues need to be kept in mind when interpreting our results. First, the number of patients included in this study was quite small. Second, carotid plaque usually comprises lipid-rich necrotic core, fibrous tissue, and calcifications other than IPH. Regions of interest in the ICA might include calcifications that are displayed as hypointensity on QSM due to their diamagnetic properties. This characteristic of calcifications may reduce the accuracy of detecting IPH by using QSM. However, calcifications on histologic sections reportedly tend to be smaller than the voxel size of 0.2 × 0.2 × 1.0 mm3 on QSM images.21 The voxel size on QSM images in the present study (0.39 × 0.39 × 0.5 mm3) was similar, and paramagnetic hemoglobin or hemosiderin or both may exert stronger effects than diamagnetic calcifications. Third, the location of most severe stenosis determined on T1-weighted 3D-FSE images was visually identified from the exterior of the specimen excised in CEA by comparing the shape of the specimen with that on T1-weighted 3D-FSE images. Therefore, histologic sections may not have exactly matched the corresponding MR image. Lastly, the circumferences of the ICA and whole plaque were traced manually rather than automatically on reformatted axial MR images and on histologic sections, respectively. Further, both circumferences included the true lumen, which might have minimally affected our data because only patients with severe stenosis of the ICA participated in this study. Whether our findings are applicable for moderate or mild ICA stenosis should be examined in future work.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-CEA QSM detects histologic intraplaque hemorrhage in cervical ICA stenosis more accurately than preoperative T1-weighted FSE imaging in patients undergoing CEA. The practical clinical algorithm for determining whether carotid artery stent placement or CEA is indicated based on this finding may reduce the incidence of development of intraoperative embolism or intraoperative procedure-related cerebral infarction.

Footnotes

  • This study was funded by Grant-in-Aids for Scientific Research from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (21K09108 and 21K09157).

  • Disclosure forms provided by the authors are available with the full text and PDF of this article at www.ajnr.org.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Liu XS,
    2. Zhao HL,
    3. Cao Y, et al
    . Comparison of carotid atherosclerotic plaque characteristics by high-resolution black-blood MR imaging between patients with first-time and recurrent acute ischemic stroke. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1257–61 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2965 pmid:22345496
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Saam T,
    2. Hetterich H,
    3. Hoffmann V, et al
    . Meta-analysis and systematic review of the predictive value of carotid plaque hemorrhage on cerebrovascular events by magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62:1081–91 doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.06.015 pmid:23850912
    FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Rothwell PM,
    2. Eliasziw M,
    3. Gutnikov SA, et al
    .; Carotid Endarterectomy Trialists’ Collaboration. Analysis of pooled data from the randomised controlled trials of endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. Lancet 2003;361:107–16 doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(03)12228-3 pmid:12531577
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Walker MD,
    2. Marler JR,
    3. Goldstein M, et al
    . Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. JAMA 1995;273:1421–28 doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520420037035
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Brott TG,
    2. Hobson RW, 2nd.,
    3. Howard G, et al
    .; CREST Investigators. Stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of carotid-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 2010;363:11–23 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0912321 pmid:20505173
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Brinjikji W,
    2. Huston J, 3rd.,
    3. Rabinstein AA, et al
    . Contemporary carotid imaging: from degree of stenosis to plaque vulnerability. J Neurosurg 2016;124:27–42 doi:10.3171/2015.1.JNS142452 pmid:26230478
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Altaf N,
    2. Beech A,
    3. Goode SD, et al
    . Carotid intraplaque hemorrhage detected by magnetic resonance imaging predicts embolization during carotid endarterectomy. J Vasc Surg 2007;46:31–36 doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2007.02.072 pmid:17543492
    CrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Sitzer M,
    2. Müller W,
    3. Siebler M, et al
    . Plaque ulceration and lumen thrombus are the main sources of cerebral microemboli in high-grade internal carotid artery stenosis. Stroke 1995;26:1231–33 doi:10.1161/01.str.26.7.1231 pmid:7604420
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Kobayashi M,
    2. Ogasawara K,
    3. Inoue T, et al
    . Urgent endarterectomy using pretreatment with free radical scavenger, edaravone, and early clamping of the parent arteries for cervical carotid artery stenosis with crescendo transient ischemic attacks caused by mobile thrombus and hemodynamic cerebral ischemia. Neurol MedChir (Tokyo) 2007;47:121–25 doi:10.2176/nmc.47.121 pmid:17384494
    CrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Bijuklic K,
    2. Wandler A,
    3. Hazizi F, et al
    . The PROFI study (Prevention of Cerebral Embolization by Proximal Balloon Occlusion Compared to Filter Protection During Carotid Artery Stenting): a prospective randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:1383–89 doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2011.11.035 pmid:22284330
    FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Stabile E,
    2. Sannino A,
    3. Schiattarella GG, et al
    . Cerebral embolic lesions detected with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging following carotid artery stenting: a meta-analysis of 8 studies comparing filter cerebral protection and proximal balloon occlusion. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2014;7:1177–83 doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2014.05.019 pmid:25240544
    CrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Sato Y,
    2. Ogasawara K,
    3. Narumi S, et al
    . Optimal MR plaque imaging for cervical carotid artery stenosis in predicting the development of microembolic signals during exposure of carotid arteries in endarterectomy: comparison of 4 T1-weighted imaging techniques. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:1146–54 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4674 pmid:26846926
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Yoshida K,
    2. Narumi O,
    3. Chin M, et al
    . Characterization of carotid atherosclerosis and detection of soft plaque with use of black-blood MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:868–74 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1015 pmid:18296548
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Yoshimura S,
    2. Yamada K,
    3. Kawasaki M, et al
    . High-intensity signal on time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography indicates carotid plaques at high risk for cerebral embolism during stenting. Stroke 2011;42:3132–37 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.615708 pmid:21868725
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Saito A,
    2. Sasaki M,
    3. Ogasawara K, et al
    . Carotid plaque signal differences among four kinds of T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging techniques: a histopathological correlation study. Neuroradiology 2012;54:1187–94 doi:10.1007/s00234-012-1025-9 pmid:22430326
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Bradley WG, Jr.
    . MR appearance of hemorrhage in the brain. Radiology 1993;189:15–26 doi:10.1148/radiology.189.1.8372185 pmid:8372185
    CrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. de Rochefort L,
    2. Liu T,
    3. Kressler B, et al
    . Quantitative susceptibility map reconstruction from MR phase data using Bayesian regularization: validation and application to brain imaging. Magn Reson Med 2010;63:194–206 doi:10.1002/mrm.22187 pmid:19953507
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Liu T,
    2. Surapaneni K,
    3. Lou M, et al
    . Cerebral microbleeds: burden assessment by using quantitative susceptibility mapping. Radiology 2012;262:269–78 doi:10.1148/radiol.11110251 pmid:22056688
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Chang S,
    2. Zhang J,
    3. Liu T, et al
    . Quantitative susceptibility mapping of intracerebral hemorrhages at various stages. J Magn Reson Imaging 2016;44:420–25 doi:10.1002/jmri.25143 pmid:26718014
    CrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Chen W,
    2. Zhu W,
    3. Kovanlikaya I, et al
    . Intracranial calcifications and hemorrhages: characterization with quantitative susceptibility mapping. Radiology 2014;270:496–505 doi:10.1148/radiol.13122640 pmid:24126366
    CrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Azuma M,
    2. Maekawa K,
    3. Yamashita A, et al
    . Characterization of carotid plaque components by quantitative susceptibility mapping. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2020;41:310–17 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6374 pmid:31879331
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Ikebe Y,
    2. Ishimaru H,
    3. Imai H, et al
    . Quantitative susceptibility mapping for carotid atherosclerotic plaques: a pilot study. Magn Reson Med Sci 2020;19:135–40
  23. 23.↵
    1. Wang C,
    2. Zhang Y,
    3. Du J, et al
    . Quantitative susceptibility mapping for characterization of intraplaque hemorrhage and calcification in carotid atherosclerotic disease. J Magn Reson Imaging 2020;52:534–41 doi:10.1002/jmri.27064 pmid:32039515
    CrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Sun H,
    2. Wilman HA
    . Background field removal using spherical mean value filtering and Tikhonov regularization. Magn Reson Med 2014;71:1151–57 doi:10.1002/mrm.24765 pmid:23666788
    CrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Shirai T,
    2. Sato R,
    3. Taniguchi Y, et al
    . Quantitative susceptibility mapping using adaptive edge-pre-serving filtering. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of ISMRM. International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine; 2015:3319
  26. 26.↵
    1. Shirai T,
    2. Sato R,
    3. Kawata Y, et al
    . Region expansion of background field removal with local spherical harmonics approximation for whole-brain quantitative susceptibility mapping. Magn Reson Med Sci 2023;22:497–514 doi:10.2463/mrms.mp.2021-0043 pmid:36372397
    CrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Yamaguchi A,
    2. Kudo K,
    3. Sato R, et al
    . Efficacy of quantitative susceptibility mapping with brain surface correction and vein removal for detecting increase magnetic susceptibility in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Magn Reson Med Sci 2023;22:87–94 doi:10.2463/mrms.mp.2021-0015 pmid:35264494
    CrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Rutgers DR,
    2. Blankensteijn JD,
    3. van der Grond J
    . Preoperative MRA flow quantification in CEA patients: flow differences between patients who develop cerebral ischemia and patients who do not develop cerebral ischemia during cross-clamping of the carotid artery. Stroke 2000;31:3021–28 doi:10.1161/01.str.31.12.3021 pmid:11108766
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  • Received February 28, 2024.
  • Accepted after revision May 21, 2024.
  • © 2024 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
PreviousNext
Back to top
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Diagnostic Accuracy of Preoperative Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping for Detecting Histologic Intraplaque Hemorrhage in Cervical ICA Stenosis in Patients Undergoing Carotid Endarterectomy
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
Daisuke Oomori, Yosuke Akamatsu, Ikuko Uwano, Futoshi Mori, Tsuyoshi Matsuda, Ryo Sugimoto, Michiko Suzuki, Shunrou Fujiwara, Masakazu Kobayashi, Makoto Sasaki, Kunihiro Yoshioka, Naoki Yanagawa, Kuniaki Ogasawara
Diagnostic Accuracy of Preoperative Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping for Detecting Histologic Intraplaque Hemorrhage in Cervical ICA Stenosis in Patients Undergoing Carotid Endarterectomy
American Journal of Neuroradiology Sep 2024, DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A8356

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Diagnostic Accuracy of Preoperative Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping for Detecting Histologic Intraplaque Hemorrhage in Cervical ICA Stenosis in Patients Undergoing Carotid Endarterectomy
Daisuke Oomori, Yosuke Akamatsu, Ikuko Uwano, Futoshi Mori, Tsuyoshi Matsuda, Ryo Sugimoto, Michiko Suzuki, Shunrou Fujiwara, Masakazu Kobayashi, Makoto Sasaki, Kunihiro Yoshioka, Naoki Yanagawa, Kuniaki Ogasawara
American Journal of Neuroradiology Sep 2024, DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A8356
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSIONS
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

  • The insula and malignant cerebral edema
  • ICH Shape & Density Predict Rebleeding after MICE
  • Circle of Willis Variants and Stroke Outcomes
Show more Neurovascular/Stroke Imaging

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editor's Choice
  • Fellows' Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Video Articles

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

More from AJNR

  • Trainee Corner
  • Imaging Protocols
  • MRI Safety Corner
  • Book Reviews

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcasts
  • AJNR Scantastics

Resources

  • Turnaround Time
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Submit a Video Article
  • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Statistical Tips
  • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Author Policies
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • News and Updates

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Board Alumni
  • Alerts
  • Permissions
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Advertise with Us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Feedback
  • Terms and Conditions
  • AJNR Editorial Board Alumni

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire