Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T05:37:09.599Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

22 - Transcranial Doppler monitoring during carotid endarterectomy

from (iii) - Intracranial cerebrovascular applications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

A. Ross Naylor
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Leicester Royal Infirmary, UK
Michael G. Hennerici
Affiliation:
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Germany
Stephen P. Meairs
Affiliation:
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Germany
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The introduction of transcranial Doppler (TCD) ultrasound in 1982 (Aaslid et al., 1982) was followed by a period of enthusiastic clinical application, particularly during carotid endarterectomy (Padayachee et al., 1986; Naylor et al., 1991). However, this initial enthusiasm was tempered by the publication of reports that its routine use was not associated with any significant reduction in the overall risk of stroke during carotid surgery (Bornstein et al., 1996).

However, as with virtually every other monitoring modality, meaningful debate as to the role of TCD during carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has primarily been limited by a failure to ask the right questions (Naylor, 1999). The main problem remains that most monitoring methods have concentrated solely on identifying those at greatest risk of suffering hemodynamic failure during carotid clamping and, thereafter, to develop criteria for the selective use of a shunt. The paradox, however, is that hemodynamic failure is a relatively rare cause of perioperative stroke (Krul et al., 1989), the commonest single cause being thromboembolism (Riles et al., 1994).

Accordingly, should the stroke rate remain unchanged, following implementation of a policy of intraoperative TCD monitoring, there is then a tendency to simply discredit TCD without asking further critical questions (Naylor, 1999). In short, how can TCD be blamed for a stroke that was due to embolization of luminal thrombus following restoration of flow if no attempt was made to identify and remove the thrombus in the first place?

Type
Chapter
Information
Cerebrovascular Ultrasound
Theory, Practice and Future Developments
, pp. 317 - 323
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×