All Title Author
Keywords Abstract

One Case of Suspected Angiostenosis Revealed by MRA Following Carotid Endarterectomy Due to a Rare Cause

DOI: 10.4236/ojmn.2018.83023, PP. 276-281

Keywords: Carotid Endarterectomy, Operation, Metal Artifact, Surgical Instruments

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib


We herein report on a case in which magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) following carotid endarterectomy revealed the appearance of angiostenosis due to an artifact of metallic powder, which was thought to have come from an old surgical instrument. The patient was a 77-year-old male. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) was performed for stenosis in the internal carotid artery of his left neck (82%). Upon observing a decline in renal function following CEA surgery, a postoperative cervical MRA revealed the appearance of high-grade stenosis at the common carotid artery on which surgery was performed. No stenosis was revealed upon carotid ultrasonography and angiography. In the original MRA image, an orbicular low intensity area was observed in concordance with the narrow segment. 3D computed tomography (3D-CT) revealed a metallic finding, suggesting it was an artifact caused by metal powder. Close inspection of the metal surgical instruments used during surgery revealed slight damage to a suture snare which had been used for 30 years. Going forward, it is necessary to pay attention to old surgical instruments, introduce a system by which the number of years and the frequency of use of each surgical instrument can be learned, and replace them with new equipment as necessary.


[1]  Arunkumar, M.J. and Rajshekhar, V. (1998) Artifacts in Magnetic Resonance Images Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Report of Two Cases. British Journal of Neurosurgery, 12, 553-555.
[2]  Elliott, C.A., Fox, R., Ashforth, R., Gourishankar, S. and Nataraj, A. (2016) Magnetic Resonanceimaging Artifact Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Atrabecular Metal Cage. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 24, 496-501.
[3]  Firsching, R.P., Heindel, W., Ernestus, R.I., Frowein, R.A. and Bunke, J. (1987) Postoperativemagnetic Resonance Imaging Artifacts. Report of Three Cases. Journal of Neurosurgery, 67, 776-778.
[4]  Peterman, S.B., Hoffman Jr., J.C. and Malko, J.A. (1991) Magnetic Resonance Artifact in the Postoperative Cervical Spine. A Potential Pitfall. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 16, 721-725.
[5]  Sridhar, K., Ramamurthi, R., Vasudevan, M.C., et al. (1999) Magnetic Resonance Imaging Artifact Following Acoustic Neurofibroma Surgery. Case Report. Neurologia Medico-Chirurgica (Tokyo), 39, 938-940.
[6]  Toro, V.E., Goodrich, A., Lundy, D.W., Meeks, L., Figueroa, R.E. and Binet, E.F. (1993) MR Artifacts after Anterior Cervical Diskectomy and Fusion: A Cadaver Study. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, 17, 696-699.
[7]  Yoshino, M.T., Temeltas, O.M., Carter, L.P., Lowe, T. and Darkazanli, A. (1993) Metallicpostoperative Artifacts on Cervical MR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 14, 747-749.
[8]  Bertorini, T.E. and Laster, R. (1995) False Evidence of Carotid Stenosis on Magneticresonance Angiography Caused by Surgical Clips. Journal of Neuroimaging, 5, 206-208.
[9]  Duro, M. (2014) Surgical Instrument Tracking System Advancements and Benefits. AORN Journal, 100, C7-C8.
[10]  Kusuda, K., Yamashita, K., Ohnishi, A., Tanaka, K., Komino, M., Honda, H., Tanaka, S., Okubo, T., Tripette, J. and Ohta, Y. (1988) Management of Surgical Instruments with Radio Frequency Identification Tags. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, 29, 236-247.
[11]  Yasuhara, H., Fukatsu, K., Komatsu, T., Obayashi, T., Saito, Y. and Uetera, Y. (2012) Prevention of Medical Accidents Caused by Defective Surgical Instruments. Surgery, 151, 153-161.


comments powered by Disqus