Chaturvedi, Seemant

Historically, the management of carotid artery disease has primarily focused on the degree of stenosis as the main indicator for assessing stroke etiology, risk, and need for intervention. However, accumulating evidence suggests that structural and biological features within the arterial wall, such as intraplaque hemorrhage, may have superior diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic values. Under current guidelines, unless an atheroma results in ≥50% stenosis, it is not considered the cause of a cerebrovascular event. This results in extensive and often unproductive diagnostic workup, prescription of ineffective medical therapy, and preclusion of patients from receiving revascularization procedures that have been shown to prevent recurrent cerebrovascular events in cases of ≥50% stenosis. A subset of embolic strokes of undetermined source, which account for up to 25% of all ischemic cerebrovascular events, are thought to be due to thromboembolic phenomena from undiagnosed plaque disruptions in nonstenotic arteries (<50% stenosis). Recently, it has been proposed to reclassify this subgroup of patients as symptomatic nonstenotic carotid if the carotid plaque ipsilateral to the cerebrovascular event presents with high-risk features including intraplaque hemorrhage, lipid-rich necrotic core, thinning/rupture of the fibrous cap, and ulceration. In this review, we first provide a historical overview of the chain of events and circumstances that resulted in the present management of carotid artery disease. Second, we embed the contemporary biomarkers of plaque vulnerability in a modern mechanistic paradigm of carotid plaque disruption and thromboembolization. Third, we review the clinically available imaging tools to detect these biomarkers, and how their use has started to shed light on the prevalence and natural history of this underdiagnosed condition. Fourth, we review recent clinical studies employing a contemporary definition of symptomatic nonstenotic carotid and discuss targeted treatments for this condition. Finally, we make a case to generate the much-needed high-level evidence to align the clinical management of patients with symptomatic nonstenotic carotid with a contemporary understanding of plaque disruption and thromboembolization.