Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2023 Sep 14;18(9):e0291521. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291521

Impaired cerebrovascular reactivity correlates with reduced retinal vessel density in patients with carotid artery stenosis: Cross-sectional, single center study

Rita Magyar-Stang 1,2,*, Lilla István 3, Hanga Pál 1,2, Borbála Csányi 4, Anna Gaál 4, Zsuzsanna Mihály 5, Zsófia Czinege 5, Péter Sótonyi 5, Horváth Tamás 6, Akos Koller 6,7,8, Dániel Bereczki 1, Illés Kovács 3,9,10, Róbert Debreczeni 1
Editor: Ayman Elnahry11
PMCID: PMC10501613  PMID: 37708176

Abstract

Background

The cerebral and retinal circulation systems are developmentally, anatomically, and physiologically interconnected. Thus, we hypothesized that hypoperfusion due to atherosclerotic stenosis of the internal carotid artery (ICA) can result in disturbances of both cerebral and retinal microcirculations. We aimed to characterize parameters indicating cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) and retinal microvascular density in patients with ICA stenosis, and assess if there is correlation between them.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study the middle cerebral artery (MCA) blood flow velocity was measured by transcranial Doppler (TCD) and, simultaneously, continuous non-invasive arterial blood pressure measurement was performed on the radial artery by applanation tonometry. CVR was assessed based on the response to the common carotid artery compression (CCC) test. The transient hyperemic response ratio (THRR) and cerebral arterial resistance transient hyperemic response ratio (CAR-THRR) were calculated. Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) was used to determine vessel density (VD) on the papilla whole image for all (VDP-WIall) and for small vessels (VDP-WIsmall). The same was done in the peripapillary region: all (VDPPall), and small (VDPPsmall) vessels. The VD of superficial (VDMspf) and deep (VDMdeep) macula was also determined. Significance was accepted when p<0.05.

Results

Twenty-four ICA stenotic patients were evaluated. Both CVR and retinal VD were characterized. There was a significant, negative correlation between CAR-THRR (median = -0.40) and VDPPsmall vessels (median = 52%), as well as between VDPPall vessels (median = 58%), and similar correlation between CAR-THRR and VDP-WIsmall (median = 49.5%) and between VDP-WIall (median = 55%).

Conclusion

The significant correlation between impaired cerebrovascular reactivity and retinal vessel density in patients with ICA stenosis suggests a common mechanism of action. We propose that the combined use of these diagnostic tools (TCD and OCTA) helps to better identify patients with increased ischemic or other cerebrovascular risks.

Introduction

Most of the total deaths in the countries of the world, regardless of their economic development, are due to cardiovascular diseases, and their most common pathological basis is atherosclerosis [1]. This progressive, generalized vascular disease is probably inevitable since aging is the number one and uncontrollable risk factor for its development [2–6]. In the asymptomatic population, atherosclerosis can be detected in 50% over the age of 40, and the rate of consequent carotid stenosis is 10% over the age of 60 [7]. The considerable portion of cerebral ischemic events (~30%) results from atherosclerotic steno-occlusive disease of the internal carotid artery (ICA) [1, 8, 9], which can be prevented and treated if patients at high ischemic risk are identified in time. The most serious complication of cerebral circulation is due to hypoperfusion resulting in cerebral and retinal ischemia [10–12], which could lead to disability, cognitive and retinal dysfunction as shown by clinical [6, 13–15] and experimental studies [16–21]. These parallel pathological events are logical consequences of the fact that the cerebral and retinal circulations are developmentally, anatomically, and physiologically interconnected [8, 22, 23]. However, there is few if any study investigating the cerebral and retinal vascular alterations simultaneously in patients with atherosclerotic ICA stenosis, which would however show the general presence of atherosclerotic vascular disease and facilitate the correct diagnosis and the consequent treatments. On the basis of the above we hypothesized that in patients with atherosclerotic ICA stenosis–which is likely an indicator of systemic atherosclerotic vascular diseases–both cerebral and retinal circulations are affected [15, 24] and there is a correlation between the functional responses of cerebral vessels. Fig 1 illustrates the common origin of the two vascular networks.

Fig 1. Schematic depiction of cerebral and retinal circulation affected of atherosclerotic stenosis of the internal carotid artery.

Fig 1

ICA = internal carotid artery; MCA = middle cerebral artery (created with www.biorender.com).

Aim

The aim of the present study was to characterize the parameters indicating cerebrovascular reactivity and retinal vascular density changes and assess if correlation exist between them in older adults with atherosclerotic carotid stenosis.

Materials and methods

This cross-sectional study was approved by the Regional, Institutional Scientific Research Ethics Committee of Semmelweis University (SE RKEB permit number: 256/2018) and registered on the ClinicalTrials.gov website (Reg No: NCT03840265). The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. Patients with significant ICA stenosis were evaluated at the Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery of Semmelweis University after providing them with detailed oral information and gaining their written consent, were prospectively and consecutively enrolled between 01.01.2019 and 30.09.2021. and data processing began after patient enrollment. Authors participating in data curation, project administration and investigation had access to information that could identify individual participants during or after data collection. Patients underwent CT angiography as part of standard-of-care diagnostic evaluation using a routine clinical imaging protocol. Patients with significant (≥70%), symptomatic (with ipsilateral, hemispheric, non-lacunar infarct or transient ischemic attack in the past 6 months) and asymptomatic (without ipsilateral, hemispherical infarct) ICA stenosis were screened for enrolment [25].

Inclusion criteria for the study were threefold: significant carotid artery stenosis (≥ 70%) was determined by 256-slice computed tomography angiography (CTA) (Brilliance iCT 256, Philips Healthcare, Best, Netherlands) based on the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) criteria [25] and planned endarterectomy. Exclusion criteria for the TCD examination were atrial fibrillation, extensive embolic plaques in the common carotid artery prone to fragment when compressed, and carotid sinus hyperesthesia. Patients with macular degeneration, glaucoma, vitreomacular diseases, previous intraocular anti-VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) injection, clinically significant media opacity, and nystagmus were excluded from OCTA examination. Demographic and medical history data of the patients were prospectively collected.

During the study period, 89 of 108 patients with significant ICA stenosis agreed to participate in the study. Among these, TCD examination could not be performed on 18 patients due to a completely missing insonation window, and on further 15 patients TCD evaluation was not possible due to a non-optimal signal-to-noise ratio. Altogether 32 patients were excluded from the study group due to the OCTA exclusion criteria. Finally, we analyzed the TCD and OCTA results of 24 patients with significant ICA stenosis.

Transcranial Doppler (TCD) study protocol

TCD was performed as previously described [26–28] utilizing a novel data processing method (S1 Appendix). During TCD measurements, continuous, non-invasive, beat-to-beat arterial blood pressure (ABP) monitoring was performed with radial artery applanation tonometry (Colin-BP508, Hayashi Komaki Aichi, Japan). Calibration to mmHg before and after every common carotid artery compression test was made by the same equipment’s sphygmomanometer.

Data processing

A detailed description of the data processing can be found in the supplementary information (S2 Appendix).

Common carotid artery compression test–CCC test [29–32]

To assess the CVR we have used CCC test, which consists of a temporal (10 s) manual compression of the common carotid artery, while the BFV is continuously measured and registered in the ipsilateral MCA with TCD. During CCC, a significant decrease in BFV occurs in the ipsilateral MCA, and when compression is ended, a rapid, transient increase in BFV can be measured: this phenomenon is the transient hyperemic response (THR) [31, 32].

Fig 2 shows an original registration of the changes in blood flow velocity measured by TCD, before, during and after CCC (Fig 1).

Fig 2. Original records of the common carotid artery compression test.

Fig 2

A (upper panel): Original figure shows changes in blood flow velocity measured by TCD of the ipsilateral MCA, before, during, and after common carotid artery compression. The increase of BFV above baseline after release of compression is termed transient hyperemic response (THR). The record shows an increase in BFV after the release of compression above baseline, indicating the THR of a healthy volunteer. In the inset: the calculation of the THRR is depicted. BFV of MCA = blood flow velocity of the ipsilateral MCA; CCC = common carotid artery compression; Vs1 = average of systolic BFV of the baseline; Vs2 = maximum systolic BFV after the release of the compression. A (lower panel): Original record shows changes in BFV measured by TCD in the ipsilateral MCA before, during and after CCC. The lack of THR in patients with severe ICA stenosis indicate impaired cerebrovascular reactivity. B (upper panel): Calculated cerebral arterial resistance (CAR) of the ipsilateral MCA and its changes before and after the common carotid artery compression. The record shows a decrease in CAR after the release of compression, indicating the transient hyperemic response (THR) of a healthy volunteer. B (lower panel): minimally changed CAR and the lack of THR in patient with severe ICA stenosis indicating impaired cerebrovascular reactivity. Since ABP can be considered as arterial perfusion pressure before and after but not during CCC, the dashed line indicates the hypothetical change in CAR. Calculation of CAR is depicted in the inset. CAR-THRR = cerebral arterial resistance–transient hyperemic response ratio; CAR1 = average of baseline CAR; CAR2 = CAR at the release of the compression.

The CCC test was performed in a standardized manner for 10 seconds [31] (S3 Appendix).

Parameters of blood flow velocity changes in response to CCC

Transient hyperemic response ratio (THRR): expresses the change in systolic BFV measured directly after the release of CCC compared to the baseline value.

THRR=VS2−VS1VS1

VS1 = average systolic BFV of the baseline; VS2 = systolic BFV maximum after the release of the compression (Fig 2).

Cerebral arterial resistance—transient hyperemic response ratio (CAR-THRR): cerebral arterial resistance (CAR) refers to the reciprocal value of the change in mean BFVmean in MCA (BFVmean MCA) per unit change in ABPmean.

CAR=ABPmeanBFVmeanMCA

CAR cannot be calculated during compression (dashed line on Fig 2/B), but at baseline and after CCC release. Similar to THRR, CAR-THRR expresses the change in CAR measured at release of CCC compared to the baseline CAR value.

CAR−THRR=CAR2−CAR1CAR1

Where CAR1 = average of baseline CAR; CAR2 = CAR at the release of the CCC.

CAR-THRR therefore also takes into account the simultaneous change in arterial blood pressure. If cerebral resistance vessels dilate because of reduced MCA perfusion due to carotid compression, then resistance to flow decreases, hence the value is negative. A less negative value corresponds to a greater decrease in resistance during compression, indicating a greater cerebrovascular reactivity. A lower value for THRR and a higher value for CAR-THRR indicate decreased cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) (Fig 2).

Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) study protocol

OCTA is a fast, non-invasive technique, that allows visualization of blood flow in different layers of the retina and choroid without the need of any contrast agent injection. OCTA measures the movement of red blood cells in the blood vessels, which provides information about the perfusion of the different tissues [33–36]. In the present study, on the same patients undergoing TCD measurements OCTA examination was performed with the AngioVue OCTA system as previously described [22], using the SSADA (split-spectrum amplitude-decorrelation angiography) software algorithm (RTVue XR Avanti with AngioVue, Optovue Inc, Fremont, CA, USA) (Fig 3). The software evaluated the image quality (scan quality—SQ) of the OCTA recordings on a 10-point scale, and only test results with an SQ value exceeding 5 points were included in the study [37]. Images containing motion artifacts (such as white line artifacts, vessel discontinuities, vessel doubling, or noise), segmentation errors, or projection artifacts were excluded [37]. Three OCTA examinations of the macular, papillary, and peripapillary areas were performed on each patient, and the best image quality was analyzed during data processing.

Fig 3. Color coded OCTA images of vascular networks of the papilla.

Fig 3

Comparison of images of a young, healthy volunteer (A) and an older patient with significant internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis (B) shows substantial differences in the vascular density (VD) of their papilla. The color scale on the right indicates the percentage of vessel density.

OCTA variables

One of the parameters that characterize the retinal vascular network is the vessel density (VD) [33, 38–40]. This value expresses the vascularity of the area examined in the skeletonized image. The VD was determined on the papillary area (P) by the software defined 4.5×4.5 mm whole image (whole image—WI) for all vessels (VDP-WIall) and selectively for only the small vessels (VDP-WIsmall) (S4 Appendix). The peripapillary region (PP) was defined by the software as an area enclosed by a 2.5 mm inner ring and a 4.5 mm outer ring, centered on the optic disc. Similarly, on the PP, VD was also determined for all vessels (VDPPall) and selectively for small vessels (VDPPsmall). Another region examined was the superficial (VDMspf) and deep (VDMdeep) vascular network of the macula in a 3×3 mm area.

Statistical analysis and data processing

Due to the non-normal distribution of the continuous variables and the relatively small sample size, non-parametric tests were performed: Spearman’s correlation test and the Mann-Whitney U test were used. Missing data were excluded from the calculations. Statistical analysis and data visualization were performed with the Prism Graph Pad software (Version 8.0.1., San Diego, CA USA). P<0.05 was considered as statistically significant. The normality test was performed with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, based on which the data showed a non-normal distribution. The minimum sample size was determined by statistical power calculation (power 0.80; p = 0.05) using data from previous studies at our institution and the method proposed by Hulley et al. for correlation analyses [41]. The minimum number of eyes to be included in this study was calculated to be 22 eyes to provide sufficient power for bivariate correlation analyses.

Results

Demographic and medical history data of the patients are summarized in Table 1. In Table 2 the TCD and OCTA data characteristics are summarized.

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the study group.

Demographic data Value
Age (mean±SD) years 69.4 ± 6.8
Sex (male/female) 18/6
Hypertension (n/%) 24/100
Diabetes mellitus (n/%) 7/29
Smoking (n/%) 8/33
Contralateral ICA steno-occlusive disease (n/%) 7/29
Symptomatic ICA stenosis (n / %) 6/25

ICA = internal carotid artery

Table 2. Baseline characteristics of TCD and OCTA data in older patients with ICA stenosis.

TCD data mean ± SD (n = 24)
baseline mean ABP (mmHg) 103.8 ± (18.0)
baseline systolic BFV (cm/s) 82.3 ± (20.1)
baseline mean BFV (cm/s) 54.1 ± (15.0)
baseline CAR (mm Hg * s * cm-1) 2.1 ± (0.8)
THRR (-) 0.2 ± (0.2)
CAR-THRR (-) -0.2 ± (0.1)
OCTA data (%) mean ± SD (n = 24)
VDPPsmall 51.2 ± (2.7)
VDPPall 57.7 ± (2.6)
VDP-WIsmall 48.9 ± (2.9)
VDP-WIall 55.2 ± (2.3)
VDMspf 43.6 ± (4.4)
VDMdeep 48.1 ± (3.9)

TCD = transcranial Doppler sonography; ABP = arterial blood pressure; BFV = blood flow velocity; CAR = cerebral arterial resistance; THRR = transient hyperemic response ratio; CAR-THRR = cerebral arterial resistance transient—hyperemic response ratio; OCTA = optical coherence tomography angiography; M = macular region; P = papilla; PP = peripapillary region; WI = whole image; spf = superficial; VD = vessel density; WI = whole image; SD = standard deviation

Cerebrovascular reactivity and calculated cerebral arterial resistance

In order to illustrate changes in cerebrovascular reactivity a CCC test-induced transient hyperemic response of a healthy volunteer with preserved cerebrovascular reactivity and a patient with severe ICA stenosis and impaired cerebrovascular reactivity are shown in Fig 2.

In order to illustrate changes in arterial resistance a transient hyperemic response of a healthy volunteer with preserved resistance change and a patient with severe ICA stenosis with decreased cerebral arterial resistance change are shown in Fig 2.

To contrast these results to healthy vascular system in the present study five age-matched control participants (mean age = 63.2 ± 7.1) with an absence of atherosclerotic carotid artery disease and other major vascular risk factors were recruited. Statistical analysis showed a significant difference in CAR-THRR between the control and study group (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.045).

Vessel density

To illustrate the correspondence between functional cerebrovascular changes and changes in the blood flow in retinal vasculature in Fig 3, retinal microvascular images of a healthy volunteer (left) and that of the same patient included in Fig 2 with severe ICA stenosis (right) are depicted. It can be well appreciated that, compared to healthy subject, both total and macular vessel densities are substantially reduced in the ICA stenotic patient (Fig 3).

Correlations between TCD and OCTA variables

Among the variables of the TCD and OCTA, there was a significant, negative correlation between the cerebral arterial resistance—transient hyperemic response ratio (CAR-THRR) and peripapillary vessel density of small vessels (VDPPsmall) (p = 0.003; Spearman r = -0.57) (Fig 4/A), and of all vessels (VDPPall) (p = 0 .01; Spearman r = -0.48) (Fig 4/B). We also found a significant, negative correlation between the cerebral arterial resistance—transient hyperemic response ratio (CAR-THRR) and vessel density of small vessels in the papilla whole image (VDP-WIsmall) (Spearman correlation test, p = 0 .01; Spearman r = -0.52) (Fig 4/C) and of all vessels (VDP-WIall) (Spearman correlation test, p = 0 .02; Spearman r = -0.45). (Fig 4/D) (Fig 4). There were no correlations among the other OCT and TCD variables (Table 3).

Fig 4. Significant negative correlations between the calculated cerebral arterial resistance—transient hyperemic response ratio and vessel density of the small and all vessels in the peripapillary/ papilla whole image region in older patients with ICA stenosis.

Fig 4

CAR-THRR = cerebral arterial resistance—transient hyperemic response ratio; VD = vessel density; PP = peripapillary region; P-WI = papilla whole image.

Table 3. Spearman correlation tests of OCTA and TCD variables in older patients with ICA stenosis.

TCD variables OCTA variables Spearman R p value
CAR-THRR VDPPsmall -0.57 0.003
THRR 0.18 0.39
CAR-THRR VDPPall -0.48 0.01
THRR 0.19 0.38
CAR-THRR VDP-WIsmall -0.52 0.01
THRR 0.18 0.37
CAR-THRR VDP-WIall -0.45 0.02
THRR 0.20 0.34
CAR-THRR VDMspf 0.08 0.68
THRR -0.18 0.40
CAR-THRR VDMdeep 0.18 0.39
THRR -0.14 0.50

CAR-THRR = cerebral arterial resistance transient hyperemic response ratio; M = macular region; P = papilla; PP = peripapillary region; spf = superficial; THRR = transient hyperemic response ratio; VD = vessel density; WI = whole image

Discussion

The salient findings of the present study are that in patients with significant ICA stenosis there were 1) functional deficit of cerebrovascular responsiveness, tested by common carotid artery compression test, 2) severely reduced retinal vessel density and 3) strong correlations between the cerebrovascular functional and retinal vessel density variables. These findings suggest that common alterations and pathomechanisms underlie the atherosclerotic changes in the cerebral and retinal vasculature identified for the first time in ICA stenotic patients by simultaneous use of functional TCD and OCTA modalities.

Hemodynamic basis of reduced cerebrovascular reactivity

To test our hypothesis, we used the non-invasive transcranial Doppler technique (TCD) known to have excellent temporal sensitivity [42–45] to follow the changes in blood flow velocity in the middle cerebral artery (MCA) in various conditions [43, 46]. Assuming that neither the position of the TCD transducer, nor the diameter of the vessel examined changes during a cerebral vasoactive stimulus, the change in flow velocity that occurs is proportional to the change in the cerebral blood flow [47]. Previous studies have shown that the detailed analysis of envelope fitted to the maximum of the flow time-frequency (velocity) power spectrum after fast-Fourier transformation (shape, flow direction, average velocity) created from the Doppler frequency shift value is suitable for the analysis and quantification of hemodynamic changes, such as cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) [31, 44, 48]. The response to CCC stimulus can be divided into two phases with changes in opposite directions. The vasodilation induced by manually performed common carotid artery compression evokes considerable hypoperfusion, resulting in an increase in MCA blood flow velocity after the cessation of carotid compression, which exceeds the baseline value under intact control. Cerebral arterioles compensate to their maximum vasodilation capacity with maintained pressure autoregulation, and tissue perfusion remains sufficient. This reactive hyperperfusion then results in an opposite process, hyperperfusion-induced vasoconstriction, when MCA cerebral blood flow velocity values return to the baseline, this phenomenon is probably not passive [49, 50]. When there was an immediate and significant increase in MCA blood flow velocity after cessation of carotid compression, i.e., the THRR was high, vasoconstriction induced by increased flow also occurred rapidly. The absence or delay of transient hyperemia indicates a decrease in reactivity. In previous studies, the index calculated from THRR BFV values proved to be suitable for characterizing reduced cerebral vasoreactivity [29–32]. However, in our correlation analysis, no close relationship was seen with the mentioned BFV index and the OCT values. When another index that could determine with the CCC test was used, we found a significant correlation. This index was the CAR-THRR. In the complex evaluation of cerebrovascular reactivity tests, many previous studies emphasize the consideration of arterial blood pressure [49–52]. While the THRR is based only on the BFV change measured in the MCA, the CAR-THRR variable takes into account the simultaneous arterial blood pressure changes in addition to the BFV changes. Accordingly, the change in cerebral arterial resistance of the MCA after the cessation of manually induced (CCC) hypoperfusion, which was used to characterize the cerebral vasoreactivity, can be determined more precisely. Therefore, the CCC test can be considered a dynamic autoregulation testing method, as changes in ABP and BVF are significant within a short time. The resistance calculation of the cerebral vessels is advantageous because it expresses not only blood flow velocity but also simultaneous arterial blood pressure changes. Henceforward, in purpose of CVR characterization, parallel ABP and HR registration is considered essential because these factors are not insignificant when evaluating cerebral vasoreactivity. Normally, the CAR value at the end of CCC test is low due to maximal vasodilation, so the CAR-THRR value is negative. Thus, the decrease in blood flow velocity resistance developed after the cessation of the CCC, which was used to quantify the vasoreactivity of the brain tissue perfused by the MCA, can more accurately characterize the cerebral vascular reserve.

Role of regional differences in retinal vasculature

In the present study a correlation was only found between impaired cerebrovascular reactivity and hypoperfusion resulting from decreased circulation of papillary and peripapillary regions, but not of the macula region. The difference can be explained by the fact that the anatomical blood supply and regulatory mechanisms of the various intraocular regions are different [53, 54]. The arterial blood supply of the eye is provided by the ICA via several branches of the ophthalmic artery (central retinal artery—ensuring blood supply of the superficial layers of the retina, the short and long posterior ciliary arteries, and the anterior ciliary arteries—mainly suppling the outer retinal layers and eye structures and forming the choroid) [53, 54]. In the circulation of the macula, the branches of the central retinal artery are decisive, the macula normally has an avascular zone at the fovea where these branches are not present [55]. Due to the high metabolic demand of the macula, regulation of macular blood flow is controlled primarily by local metabolic mechanisms affecting the central retinal artery branches [56, 57]. In contrast, in the peripapillary circulation the choroid plays an important role. The short posterior ciliary arteries branch into terminal arterioles to form the arterioles of the dense outer layer of the choroid [58]. Previous studies suggest local metabolic local control does not seem to play a role in choroidal blood flow regulation [59, 60]. The choroid is richly innervated, and thus neural control mechanisms are the most relevant regulating factors [61]. The papilla is supplied by the peripapillary choroid composed of the scleral short posterior ciliary system and the recurrent choroidal arteries. Regulation, similarly to the peripapillary region, is controlled by neuronal mechanisms [62, 63].

Many of the findings of the present study are consistent with previously reported results in the literature. Similarly to our study, Zhang et al. analyzed the correlation of OCT and TCD procedures in cerebrovascular patients with ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke. They found a significant, positive correlation between baseline MCA blood flow velocity values and retinal vessel density, however, functional TCD test was not used in their study [64]. Bettermann et al. investigated retinal vasoreactivity in patients with ischemic white matter disease using a high-frequency flashing light stimulation method and showed that retinal structural microvascular damage is associated with functional impairment [65], the extent of which correlates with cerebrovascular reactivity based on the TCD-registered breath-holding test, i.e. decreased blood flow [66] velocity response in the MCA. The great advantage of that study was that it combined two functional methods, which are not performed routinely in patients [65, 67]. In line with our findings, a correlation between MCA baseline blood flow velocity parameters and retinal vessel caliber variability was found in patients with intracranial stenosis using a semi-automated computer assisted program (Singapore I Vessel Assessment) [68].

Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is known to be suitable for providing images of the retinal vascular network with high accuracy [69–71]. The OCTA method is based on the motion-contrast phenomenon, i.e., the position of the moving structures—the red blood cells—constantly changes in the layers of the retinal vascular network, while no such change occurs in poorly perfused or not at all perfused areas [72]. OCTA is a fast and easily reproducible technique, providing qualitative and quantitative results on various regions of the retinal microcirculation based on the movements of red blood cells [36]. The great advantage of the OCTA examination is that it was previously found to be suitable for monitoring retinal circulation changes after ICA revascularization, as several studies reported a significant improvement in retinal circulation after ICA revascularization not only on the ipsilateral but also on the contralateral side [22, 73–76]. Regarding the OCTA studies previous studies on the same patient group described the decrease of retinal vessel density in this patient group [22].

Strengths of the study

The main strength of our study lies in the fact that this is the first study that analyzes the correlation of functional TCD and OCTA modalities in ICA stenotic patients. The strength of the methodology of this study is its multimodal nature, which, in addition to changes in blood flow velocity, also continuously detects simultaneous changes in blood pressure, and from their rapidly and significantly changing ratio, enables accurate hemodynamic characterization. Another advantage is that our study compares two relatively easily performed, non-invasive modalities (TCD and OCTA), both of which are available in clinical routine. In the international guidelines, the percentage of the ICA stenosis and the symptoms are the determining factors in the treatment strategy of patients [66] although, no uniform consensus has developed to identify additional factors contributing to the risk of cerebral ischemia. For this reason, an additional advantage of the present study is that high-risk ICA stenotic patient can be identified by the combined use of the two modalities.

Limitations

The limitation of our study is the low number of patients, primarily due to the missing or very narrow temporal acoustic insonation window in 20–30% of the study group, likely due to the age of and gender of the patients. In our study, the rate of occurrence of an inadequate temporal insonation window is higher than in literature data, which we explain by the relatively high average age of the patients and our strict TCD examination protocol. It is of note that both TCD and OCTA examinations have technical limitations [33, 42, 44, 69, 70, 77]. However, it is also considered as the strength of our study, that we applied two very specific non-invasive techniques in the same patients. These, however, came with some limitations, but on the other hand—we believe—it makes our study unique. However, loss of patients was mainly due to strict inclusion criteria of the study protocol. Also, 17% of patients decline the examinations, because it would require extended hospital stay. In addition, the study period coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic affecting Hungary and coinciding with lockdown periods. These factors further reduced the number of potentially eligible patients in the present study.

Conclusion

The present study showed, for the first time, significant correlations between impaired cerebrovascular reactivity and reduced retinal vessel density in patients with internal carotid artery stenosis, suggesting that similar atherosclerotic changes occur, with similar mechanisms of actions in the two vascular systems, most likely due to the chronic hypoperfusion of the brain. The translational/clinical importance of these findings is that the combined use of these diagnostic tools (TCD and OCTA) may help to better identify patients with increased low-flow ischemic risk due to atherosclerosis and/or initiate appropriate treatments. Despite the mentioned limitations, based on the proven significant correlation, the two test methods complement and may even replace each other, so when one method cannot be used for technical reasons, the other can provide clinical data of similar value. Nevertheless, further studies with a larger number of patients are necessary to confirm the conclusion of present findings.

Supporting information

S1 Checklist. STROBE statement—checklist of items that should be included in reports of observational studies.

(DOCX)

S1 Appendix. Transcranial Doppler (TCD) study protocol.

The text summarizes the technical description of TCD measures.

(DOCX)

S2 Appendix. Data processing.

The text summarizes the software data processing.

(DOCX)

S3 Appendix. Common carotid artery compression test.

The text summarizes the description of the standardized common carotid artery compression test.

(DOCX)

S4 Appendix. OCTA small vessel criteria.

The text summarizes the description of the software-based small vessel definition.

(DOCX)

S1 File. Dataset of the study.

(PDF)

S2 File. English ethical approval.

(PDF)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The study was supported by the National Office for Research, Development and Innovation (Project no. NKFIK129277 ("Evaluation of cerebrovascular events in patients with occlusive carotid artery disorders based on morphological and hemodynamic features") has been implemented with the support provided by the Ministry of Innovation and Technology of Hungary from the National Research, Development, and Innovation Fund. AK: NKFI-1 K OTKA 132596 K-19, TKP2021-EGA-37 of MIT of Hungary-NRDI TKP2021-EGA funding and HAS/MTA Post-Covid 2021-34. DB: Ministry of Innovation and Technology of Hungary from the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund (Grant No: TKP2021-EGA/TKP2021-NVA/TKP2021-NKTA). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Barquera S, Pedroza-Tobías A, Medina C, Hernández-Barrera L, Bibbins-Domingo K, Lozano R, et al. Global Overview of the Epidemiology of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease. Arch Med Res. 2015;46(5):328–38. doi: 10.1016/j.arcmed.2015.06.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.North BJ, Sinclair DA. The intersection between aging and cardiovascular disease. Circ Res. 2012;110(8):1097–108. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.111.246876 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Ungvari Z, Tarantini S, Donato AJ, Galvan V, Csiszar A. Mechanisms of Vascular Aging. Circ Res. 2018;123(7):849–67. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.118.311378 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ungvari Z, Tarantini S, Sorond F, Merkely B, Csiszar A. Mechanisms of Vascular Aging, A Geroscience Perspective: JACC Focus Seminar. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;75(8):931–41. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.11.061 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ungvari Z, Kaley G, de Cabo R, Sonntag WE, Csiszar A. Mechanisms of vascular aging: new perspectives. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2010;65(10):1028–41. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glq113 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Toth P, Tarantini S, Csiszar A, Ungvari Z. Functional vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia: mechanisms and consequences of cerebral autoregulatory dysfunction, endothelial impairment, and neurovascular uncoupling in aging. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2017;312(1):H1–H20. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00581.2016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Balceniuk MD, Motyl CM, Ayers BC, Geiger JT, Sebastian A, Doyle AJ, et al. Association Between the Atherosclerotic Disease Risk Score and Carotid Artery Stenosis. J Surg Res. 2021;257:189–94. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2020.06.041 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Cabrera DeBuc D, Somfai GM, Koller A. Retinal microvascular network alterations: potential biomarkers of cerebrovascular and neural diseases. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2017;312(2):H201–H12. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00201.2016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Collaborators GS. Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet Neurol. 2021;20(10):795–820. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00252-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Adams HB BH. Kappelle LJ. Biller J. Love BB. Gordon DL. Marsh EE. Classification of subtype of acute ischemic stroke. Definitions for use in a multicenter clinical trial. TOAST. Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment. Stroke. 1993;24(1):35–41. doi: 10.1161/01.str.24.1.35 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Monteiro-Henriques I, Rocha-Sousa A, Barbosa-Breda J. Optical coherence tomography angiography changes in cardiovascular systemic diseases and risk factors: A Review. Acta Ophthalmol. 2022;100(1):e1–e15. doi: 10.1111/aos.14851 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Katan M, Luft A. Global Burden of Stroke. Seminars in neurology. 2018;38(2):208–11. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1649503 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Ihle-Hansen H, Sandset EC, Hagberg G. Subclinical Carotid Artery Atherosclerosis and Cognitive Function: A Mini-Review. Front Neurol. 2021;12:705043. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2021.705043 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Baradaran H, Dahlstrom KA, Culleton S, Sarrami AH, McFarland MM, Romero JR. Association between Extracranial Carotid Artery Plaque and Cognitive Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2022;51(5):377–85. doi: 10.1159/000526822 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Terelak-Borys B, Skonieczna K, Grabska-Liberek I. Ocular ischemic syndrome—a systematic review. Med Sci Monit. 2012;18(8):RA138–44. doi: 10.12659/msm.883260 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Iadecola C. The pathobiology of vascular dementia. Neuron. 2013;80(4):844–66. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.10.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Iadecola C, Duering M, Hachinski V, Joutel A, Pendlebury ST, Schneider JA, et al. Vascular Cognitive Impairment and Dementia: JACC Scientific Expert Panel. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(25):3326–44. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Yabluchanskiy A, Nyul-Toth A, Csiszar A, Gulej R, Saunders D, Towner R, et al. Age-related alterations in the cerebrovasculature affect neurovascular coupling and BOLD fMRI responses: Insights from animal models of aging. Psychophysiology. 2021;58(7):e13718. doi: 10.1111/psyp.13718 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Tarantini S, Balasubramanian P, Yabluchanskiy A, Ashpole NM, Logan S, Kiss T, et al. IGF1R signaling regulates astrocyte-mediated neurovascular coupling in mice: implications for brain aging. Geroscience. 2021;43(2):901–11. doi: 10.1007/s11357-021-00350-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Tarantini S, Giles CB, Wren JD, Ashpole NM, Valcarcel-Ares MN, Wei JY, et al. IGF-1 deficiency in a critical period early in life influences the vascular aging phenotype in mice by altering miRNA-mediated post-transcriptional gene regulation: implications for the developmental origins of health and disease hypothesis. Age (Dordr). 2016;38(4):239–58. doi: 10.1007/s11357-016-9943-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Tarantini S, Tucsek Z, Valcarcel-Ares MN, Toth P, Gautam T, Giles CB, et al. Circulating IGF-1 deficiency exacerbates hypertension-induced microvascular rarefaction in the mouse hippocampus and retrosplenial cortex: implications for cerebromicrovascular and brain aging. Age (Dordr). 2016;38(4):273–89. doi: 10.1007/s11357-016-9931-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.István L, Czakó C, Benyó F, Élő Á, Mihály Z, Sótonyi P, et al. The effect of systemic factors on retinal blood flow in patients with carotid stenosis: an optical coherence tomography angiography study. Geroscience. 2022;44(1):389–401. doi: 10.1007/s11357-021-00492-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Istvan L, Czako C, Elo A, Mihaly Z, Sotonyi P, Varga A, et al. Imaging retinal microvascular manifestations of carotid artery disease in older adults: from diagnosis of ocular complications to understanding microvascular contributions to cognitive impairment. Geroscience. 2021;43(4):1703–23. doi: 10.1007/s11357-021-00392-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Flaherty ML, Kissela B, Khoury JC, Alwell K, Moomaw CJ, Woo D, et al. Carotid artery stenosis as a cause of stroke. Neuroepidemiology. 2013;40(1):36–41. doi: 10.1159/000341410 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial. Methods, patient characteristics, and progress. Stroke. 1991;22(6):711–20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Debreczeni R, Amrein I, Kamondi A, Szirmai I. Hypocapnia induced by involuntary hyperventilation during mental arithmetic reduces cerebral blood flow velocity. Tohoku J Exp Med. 2009;217(2):147–54. doi: 10.1620/tjem.217.147 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Debreczeni R, Amrein I, Kollai M, Lénárd Z, Pálvölgyi L, Takáts A, et al. [Investigation of cerebral autoregulation in Parkinson’s disease—a transcranial Doppler study]. Ideggyogy Sz. 2005;58(7–8):245–52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Szirmai I, Amrein I, Pálvölgyi L, Debreczeni R, Kamondi A. Correlation between blood flow velocity in the middle cerebral artery and EEG during cognitive effort. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2005;24(1):33–40. doi: 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.12.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Smielewski P, Czosnyka M, Kirkpatrick P, McEroy H, Rutkowska H, Pickard JD. Assessment of cerebral autoregulation using carotid artery compression. Stroke. 1996;27(12):2197–203. doi: 10.1161/01.str.27.12.2197 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Giller CA. A bedside test for cerebral autoregulation using transcranial Doppler ultrasound. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1991;108(1–2):7–14. doi: 10.1007/BF01407660 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Cavill G, Simpson EJ, Mahajan RP. Factors affecting assessment of cerebral autoregulation using the transient hyperaemic response test. Br J Anaesth. 1998;81(3):317–21. doi: 10.1093/bja/81.3.317 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Girling KJ, Cavill G, Mahajan RP. The effects of nitrous oxide and oxygen on transient hyperemic response in human volunteers. Anesth Analg. 1999;89(1):175–80. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199907000-00031 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Enders C, Lang GE, Dreyhaupt J, Loidl M, Lang GK, Werner JU. Quantity and quality of image artifacts in optical coherence tomography angiography. PLoS One. 2019;14(1):e0210505. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210505 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Rabiolo A, Gelormini F, Sacconi R, Cicinelli MV, Triolo G, Bettin P, et al. Comparison of methods to quantify macular and peripapillary vessel density in optical coherence tomography angiography. PLoS One. 2018;13(10):e0205773. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205773 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Li X, Zhu S, Zhou S, Zhang Y, Ding Y, Zheng B, et al. Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography as a Noninvasive Assessment of Cerebral Microcirculatory Disorders Caused by Carotid Artery Stenosis. Dis Markers. 2021;2021:2662031. doi: 10.1155/2021/2662031 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Spaide RF, Klancnik JM, Cooney MJ. Retinal vascular layers imaged by fluorescein angiography and optical coherence tomography angiography. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(1):45–50. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.3616 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Sampson DM, Ali N, Au Yong A, Jeewa R, Rajgopal S, Dutt DDCS, et al. RTVue XR AngioVue Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Software Upgrade Impacts on Retinal Thickness and Vessel Density Measurements. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2020;9(3):10. doi: 10.1167/tvst.9.3.10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Sun C, Ladores C, Hong J, Nguyen DQ, Chua J, Ting D, et al. Systemic hypertension associated retinal microvascular changes can be detected with optical coherence tomography angiography. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):9580. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-66736-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Chua J, Chin CWL, Hong J, Chee ML, Le TT, Ting DSW, et al. Impact of hypertension on retinal capillary microvasculature using optical coherence tomographic angiography. J Hypertens. 2019;37(3):572–80. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001916 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Ong JX, Kwan CC, Cicinelli MV, Fawzi AA. Superficial capillary perfusion on optical coherence tomography angiography differentiates moderate and severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0240064. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240064 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Hulley SB CS, Browner WS, Grady D, Newman TB. Designing clinical research: an epidemiologic approach. 4th ed. ed. Gaertner R, editor. Philadelphia, PA 19103 USA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, a Wolters Kluwer; 2013. 79 p. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Purkayastha S, Sorond F. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound: technique and application. Semin Neurol. 2012;32(4):411–20. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1331812 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Naqvi J, Yap KH, Ahmad G, Ghosh J. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound: a review of the physical principles and major applications in critical care. Int J Vasc Med. 2013;2013:629378. doi: 10.1155/2013/629378 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Sharma VK, Wong KS, Alexandrov AV. Transcranial Doppler. Front Neurol Neurosci. 2016;40:124–40. doi: 10.1159/000448309 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Sejdić E, Kalika D, Czarnek N. An analysis of resting-state functional transcranial Doppler recordings from middle cerebral arteries. PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e55405. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0055405 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Panerai RB. Assessment of cerebral pressure autoregulation in humans—a review of measurement methods. Physiol Meas. 1998;19(3):305–38. doi: 10.1088/0967-3334/19/3/001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Giller CA, Bowman G, Dyer H, Mootz L, Krippner W. Cerebral arterial diameters during changes in blood pressure and carbon dioxide during craniotomy. Neurosurgery. 1993;32(5):737–41; discussion 41–2. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Marshall RS, Asllani I, Pavol MA, Cheung YK, Lazar RM. Altered cerebral hemodyamics and cortical thinning in asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. PLoS One. 2017;12(12):e0189727. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189727 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Calviello LA, Zeiler FA, Donnelly J, Uryga A, de Riva N, Smielewski P, et al. Estimation of pulsatile cerebral arterial blood volume based on transcranial doppler signals. Med Eng Phys. 2019;74:23–32. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2019.07.019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Trofimov AO, Kalent’ev GV, Agarkova DI. [Cerebrovascular resistance in patients with severe combined traumatic brain injury]. Zh Vopr Neirokhir Im N N Burdenko. 2015;79(5):28–33. doi: 10.17116/neiro201579528-33 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Claassen JAHR Thijssen DHJ, Panerai RB Faraci FM. Regulation of cerebral blood flow in humans: physiology and clinical implications of autoregulation. Physiol Rev. 2021;101(4):1487–559. doi: 10.1152/physrev.00022.2020 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Panerai RB, Hudson V, Fan L, Mahony P, Yeoman PM, Hope T, et al. Assessment of dynamic cerebral autoregulation based on spontaneous fluctuations in arterial blood pressure and intracranial pressure. Physiol Meas. 2002;23(1):59–72. doi: 10.1088/0967-3334/23/1/306 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Kels BD, Grzybowski A, Grant-Kels JM. Human ocular anatomy. Clin Dermatol. 2015;33(2):140–6. doi: 10.1016/j.clindermatol.2014.10.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Kaplan HJ. Anatomy and function of the eye. Chem Immunol Allergy. 2007;92:4–10. doi: 10.1159/000099236 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Provis JM, Penfold PL, Cornish EE, Sandercoe TM, Madigan MC. Anatomy and development of the macula: specialisation and the vulnerability to macular degeneration. Clin Exp Optom. 2005;88(5):269–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1444-0938.2005.tb06711.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Kiryu J, Asrani S, Shahidi M, Mori M, Zeimer R. Local response of the primate retinal microcirculation to increased metabolic demand induced by flicker. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1995;36(7):1240–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Stefánsson E, Wagner HG, Seida M. Retinal blood flow and its autoregulation measured by intraocular hydrogen clearance. Exp Eye Res. 1988;47(5):669–78. doi: 10.1016/0014-4835(88)90034-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Kashani AH, Chen CL, Gahm JK, Zheng F, Richter GM, Rosenfeld PJ, et al. Optical coherence tomography angiography: A comprehensive review of current methods and clinical applications. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2017;60:66–100. doi: 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2017.07.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Hayreh SS. Blood flow in the optic nerve head and factors that may influence it. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2001;20(5):595–624. doi: 10.1016/s1350-9462(01)00005-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Hayreh SS. The blood supply of the optic nerve head and the evaluation of it—myth and reality. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2001;20(5):563–93. doi: 10.1016/s1350-9462(01)00004-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Kiel JW. Modulation of choroidal autoregulation in the rabbit. Exp Eye Res. 1999;69(4):413–29. doi: 10.1006/exer.1999.0717 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Kiel JW, Lovell MO. Adrenergic modulation of choroidal blood flow in the rabbit. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996;37(4):673–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Linder J. Cerebral and ocular blood flow during alpha 2-blockade: evidence for a modulated sympathetic response. Acta Physiol Scand. 1981;113(4):511–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-1716.1981.tb06930.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Zhang X, Xiao H, Liu C, Liu S, Zhao L, Wang R, et al. Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Reveals Distinct Retinal Structural and Microvascular Abnormalities in Cerebrovascular Disease. Front Neurosci. 2020;14:588515. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2020.588515 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Bettermann K, Slocomb JE, Shivkumar V, Lott ME. Retinal vasoreactivity as a marker for chronic ischemic white matter disease? J Neurol Sci. 2012;322(1–2):206–10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Naylor AR JB. de Borst GJ. Debus S. de Haro J. Halliday A. et al. Editor’s Choice—Management of Atherosclerotic Carotid and Vertebral Artery Disease: 2017 Clinical Practice Guidelines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery: the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. 2018;55(1):3–81. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.06.021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Bettermann K, Slocomb J, Shivkumar V, Quillen D, Gardner TW, Lott ME. Impaired Retinal Vasoreactivity: An Early Marker of Stroke Risk in Diabetes. J Neuroimaging. 2017;27(1):78–84. doi: 10.1111/jon.12412 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Rhee EJ, Chung PW, Wong TY, Song SJ. Relationship of retinal vascular caliber variation with intracranial arterial stenosis. Microvasc Res. 2016;108:64–8. doi: 10.1016/j.mvr.2016.08.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Lei J, Durbin MK, Shi Y, Uji A, Balasubramanian S, Baghdasaryan E, et al. Repeatability and Reproducibility of Superficial Macular Retinal Vessel Density Measurements Using Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography En Face Images. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2017;135(10):1092–8. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.3431 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Lee MW, Kim KM, Lim HB, Jo YJ, Kim JY. Repeatability of vessel density measurements using optical coherence tomography angiography in retinal diseases. Br J Ophthalmol. 2018. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-312516 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Wang D, Li Y, Zhou Y, Jin C, Zhao Q, Wang A, et al. Asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness. A community-based, observational study. PLoS One. 2017;12(5):e0177277. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177277 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Spaide RF, Fujimoto JG, Waheed NK. Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography. Retina. 2015;35(11):2161–2. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000000881 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Cardia G, Porfido D, Guerriero S, Loizzi D, Giancipoli G. Retinal circulation after carotid artery revascularization. Angiology. 2011;62(5):372–5. doi: 10.1177/0003319710386472 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Ala-Kauhaluoma M, Koskinen SM, Silvennoinen H, Vikatmaa P, Nuotio K, Ijäs P, et al. Subfoveal choroidal thickness in ipsi- and contralateral eyes of patients with carotid stenosis before and after carotid endarterectomy: a prospective study. Acta Ophthalmol. 2021;99(5):545–52. doi: 10.1111/aos.14648 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Krytkowska E, Masiuk M, Kawa MP, Grabowicz A, Rynio P, Kazimierczak A, et al. Impact of Carotid Endarterectomy on Choroidal Thickness and Volume in Enhanced Depth Optical Coherence Tomography Imaging. J Ophthalmol. 2020;2020:8326207. doi: 10.1155/2020/8326207 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Lareyre F, Nguyen E, Raffort J, Carboni J, Doyen J, Hassen-Khodja R, et al. Changes in Ocular Subfoveal Choroidal Thickness After Carotid Endarterectomy Using Enhanced Depth Imaging Optical Coherence Tomography: A Pilot Study. Angiology. 2018;69(7):574–81. doi: 10.1177/0003319717737223 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Willie CK, Colino FL, Bailey DM, Tzeng YC, Binsted G, Jones LW, et al. Utility of transcranial Doppler ultrasound for the integrative assessment of cerebrovascular function. J Neurosci Methods. 2011;196(2):221–37. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2011.01.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Ayman Elnahry

4 Jun 2023

PONE-D-23-12728Impaired cerebrovascular reactivity correlates with reduced retinal vessel density in patients with carotid artery stenosisPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Magyar-Stang,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 19 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ayman Elnahry

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

“Ministry of Innovation and Technology of Hungary from the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund (Grant No: TKP2021-EGA/TKP2021-NVA/TKP2021-NKTA). “

We note that you have provided funding information that is currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“PS: The study was supported by the National Office for Research, Development and Innovation (Project no. NKFI-K129277 ("Evaluation of cerebrovascular events in patients with occlusive carotid artery disorders based on morphological and hemodynamic features") has been implemented with the support provided by the Ministry of Innovation and Technology of Hungary from the National Research, Development, and Innovation Fund.

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

ÁK: NKFI-1 K OTKA 132596 K¬_19, TKP2021-EGA-37 of MIT of Hungary-NRDI TKP2021-EGA funding and HAS/MTA Post-Covid 2021-34. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. We note that Figure 2 in your submission contain copyrighted images. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 2 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: the present is an interesting study aiming to correlate with high tecnhology the relationship between cerebral and retinal circulation

Some issues need to be addressed

title: authors should add if the present is a single center study or not

Abstract. I would put some values of correlation, that is some median values

Methods. It is not clear it patients were enrolled prospectively (consecutive pts) or not

Methods/results/discussion: Inclusion of 24/108 patients (although it is ok sense for a high quality study) probably may limit clinical applicability of the model to a wide range of patients

Methods. The methods part is too long. Maybe some part should be put in appendix (cct evaluation)

Methods. Do authors evalauted intra observer agreement?

Methods. Results of test for normality should be added

Reviewer #2: Nicely written manuscript and interesting findings and analysis. However, concluding that the correlation between impaired cerebrovascular reactivity and retinal vascular density as being caused by similar atherosclerotic changes should be interpreted with caution as both, ocular blood flow and cerebral blood flow are dependent on the flow in carotid artery which is impaired in those patients.

Reviewer #3: Excellent planning and execution of a great thought for research.

The idea of combining a neurological investigation modality with that of pure ocular investigation is brilliant.

My only critique is that this kind of data should be presented in a better looking manner and the results should be highlighted better as this paves the way for more future correlation between neurological and ocular modalities.

Reviewer #4: • This was a prospective, cross-sectional study aimed at correlating several parameters characterizing cerebrovascular reactivity with retinal vascular density changes in an older population with atherosclerotic carotid stenosis. The prospective nature allows adequate application of study methods on all subjects, however it is quite striking that a study that began with 108 patients ended up with 24 patients only. At this point, it seems plausible that the study may not be sufficiently powered anymore to statistically test the several parameters used by the authors in this study. Please include a section in the statistics paragraph to address this issue.

• All the parameters used by the authors do not inherently have normative data. In these types of studies, a healthy cohort of patients are usually used to correlate these figures, which the authors did not do in this study. This is particularly important because the authors determined a decrease in vessel density was seen in these atherosclerotic patients, even though a decline in vessel density is usually a normal ageing sign. A comparison to age-matched individuals may help. Please explain the reasoning behind this.

• The authors used retina vascular density as a marker of volumetric blood changes during carotid compression and release. Vascular density is usually used as a marker or ischemic changes rather than volume difference. Adjusted flow index may have been a more sensitive marker of blood flow changes, as seen in several papers in the literature. This is evident by the authors' sentence 301 in p. 20 that found no correlation between the cerebral indices and retinal OCT values, which they, rather mistakenly, label "retinal hypoperfusion. Please comment.

• The authors do not report in detail the sizes of the OCTA macular scans they used, as well as the rationale behind dividing the ONH vasculature into papillary and peripapillary, and avoiding 6x6 mm ONH scans. Please explain.

• The authors mention they used a "small vessel identification" software that identified those as less than 35 microns. Please explain the significance of this number and the reasoning behind adding this parameter.

• The "cerebrovascular reactivity" and "calculated cerebral arterial resistance" paragraphs in page 15 read more like figure legends and don't necessarily add much to the results section.

• The manuscript contains several linguistic and grammar errors, and may benefit from thorough proof-reading.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Fabrizio D'Ascenzo

Reviewer #2: Yes: Amr Wassef

Reviewer #3: Yes: Hesham Abdelaziz

Reviewer #4: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 Sep 14;18(9):e0291521. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291521.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


16 Jun 2023

Responses to Editor and Reviewers

Ayman Elnahry 16 June 2023

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Dear Ayman Elnahry,

We would like to thank you for your editorial evaluation of the manuscript and thank the Reviewers for their critical comments and suggestions, which we believe helped us to improve our manuscript. Please, find our responses to the Editorial letter below.

1. Editor comment 1#: Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming.

- We updated the formatting style of the manuscript as it is presented in the template forms, including the instruction of file naming.

2. Editor comment 2#: We note that you have provided funding information that is currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript.

- In the revised manuscript we deleted the acknowledgments and funding sections, and we have updated the funding statement in the cover letter:

“PS: The study was supported by the National Office for Research, Development and Innovation (Project no. NKFIK129277 ("Evaluation of cerebrovascular events in patients with occlusive carotid artery disorders based on morphological and hemodynamic features") has been implemented with the support provided by the Ministry of Innovation and Technology of Hungary from the National Research, Development, and Innovation Fund.

AK: NKFI-1 K OTKA 132596 K-19, TKP2021-EGA-37 of MIT of Hungary-NRDI TKP2021-EGA funding and HAS/MTA Post-Covid 2021-34.

DB: Ministry of Innovation and Technology of Hungary from the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund (Grant No: TKP2021-EGA/TKP2021-NVA/TKP2021-NKTA).

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

3. Editor comment 3#: We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

- Figure 2 is an original OCTA photo taken in our laboratory. We have uploaded the Content Permission Form. Please, let us know if you have any questions.

Please find our responses to the Reviewers' comments below:

Reviewer1#

We would like to thank you for your careful reading and useful comments. We believe they helped to improve the quality of the manuscript. Thank you for your consideration.

________________________________________

Reviewer #1 Point 1#: title: authors should add if the present is a single center study or not

Author’s response: Title has been updated: “Impaired cerebrovascular reactivity correlates with reduced retinal vessel density in patients with carotid artery stenosis: cross-sectional, single center study”

Reviewer #1 Point 2#: Abstract. I would put some values of correlation, that is some median values

Author’s response: In the Abstract the results section has been updated: “Twenty-four ICA stenotic patients were evaluated. Both CVR and retinal VD were characterized. There was a significant, negative correlation between CAR-THRR (median=-0.40) and VDPPsmall vessel type (median=52%), as well as between VDPPall vessel types (median=58%), and also similar correlation between CAR-THRR and VDP-WIsmall (median=49.5%) and between VDP-WIall (median=55%).“

Reviewer #1 Point 3#: Methods. It is not clear it patients were enrolled prospectively (consecutive pts) or not.

Author’s response: Patients were enrolled prospectively and consecutively. In the Methods we added this information: Page 6, line 83: “Patients with significant ICA stenosis were evaluated at the Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery of Semmelweis University after providing them with detailed oral information and gaining their written consent, were prospectively and consecutively enrolled between 01.01.2019 and 30.09.2021, and data processing began after patient enrollment.”

Reviewer #1 Point 4#: Methods/results/discussion: Inclusion of 24/108 patients (although it is ok sense for a high quality study) probably may limit clinical applicability of the model to a wide range of patients.

Author’s response: Yes, indeed, the Reviewer raised an important issue. In response to it we have insert the following text in the revised manuscript:

Page 24, line 406: “It is of note that both TCD and OCTA examinations have technical limitations. (1-6) However, it is also considered as the strength of our study, that we applied two very specific non-invasive techniques in the same patients. These, however, came with some limitations, but on the other hand - we believe - it makes our study unique. However, loss of exclusion of patients was mainly due to strict inclusion criteria of the study protocol. Also, 17% of patients decline the examinations, because it would require extended hospital stay.

In addition, the study period coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic affecting Hungary, as well and coinciding with lockdown periods. These factors further reduced the number of potentially eligible patients in the present study.”

Page 25, Line 424: “Despite the mentioned limitations, based on the proven significant correlation, the two test methods complement and may even replace each other, so when one method cannot be used for technical reasons, the other can provide clinical data of similar value.“

Reviewer #1 Point 5#: Methods. The methods part is too long. Maybe some part should be put in appendix (cct evaluation)

Author’s response: We agree with the Reviewer and thus some parts of the TCD and OCTA descriptions and protocols have been moved to the supporting information:

S1 Appendix. Transcranial Doppler (TCD) study protocol. The text summarizes the technical description of TCD measures.

S2 Appendix. Data processing. The text summarizes the software data processing.

S3 Appendix. Common carotid artery compression test. The text summarizes the description of the standardized common carotid artery compression test.

S4 Appendix. OCTA small vessel criteria. The text summarizes the description of the software-based small vessel definition.

Reviewer #1 Point 6#: Methods. Do authors evaluated intra observer agreement?

Author’s response: Intra- and inter-observer agreement was performed regarding the TCD measures. The intra-observer agreement of OCTA measurements was not evaluated in this study. However, several previous studies assessed the repeatability and reliability of OCTA measurements and found highly accurate. (3, 4, 7) Regarding the OCTA images the software evaluates the image quality (scan quality - SQ) of the OCTA recordings on a 10-point scale, and only test results with an SQ value exceeding 5 points were included in the study.

Reviewer #1 Point 7#: Methods. Results of test for normality should be added.

Author’s response: In Methods we added: Page 12, line 201 “The normality test was performed with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, based on which the data showed a non-normal distribution.”

________________________________________

Reviewer2#

We would like to thank you for your careful reading our manuscript and for your useful comments. We believe they helped to improve the quality of the manuscript. Thank you for your considerations.

Reviewer #2 Point 1#: Nicely written manuscript and interesting findings and analysis. However, concluding that the correlation between impaired cerebrovascular reactivity and retinal vascular density as being caused by similar atherosclerotic changes should be interpreted with caution as both, ocular blood flow and cerebral blood flow are dependent on the flow in carotid artery which is impaired in those patients.

Author’s response: Thank you for pointing out this issue. Yes, indeed, one of the objectives of our study was to assess the carotid artery region, such as the middle cerebral artery and the retinal vasculature, and whether there is a relationship between their blood flow variables. Similar atherosclerotic changes of the two system could be one factor explaining the correlation beside of the hypoperfusion caused by carotid stenosis. We agree, both decreased retinal vascular density and impaired cerebrovascular reactivity are the consequences of the altered blood flow due to atherosclerotic changes in the carotid artery. To illustrate this point, we added a new figure in the manuscript showing the common origin of cerebral and retinal vessels. (Figure will be uploaded in the required resolution to Manuscript Manager)

Figure 1. Schematic depiction of cerebral and retinal circulation affected of atherosclerotic stenosis of the internal carotid artery. ICA= internal carotid artery; MCA= middle cerebral artery (created with www.biorender.com)

________________________________________

Reviewer3#

We would like to thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript and for your useful comments. We believe they helped to improve the quality of the manuscript. Thank you for your considerations.

Reviewer #3 Point 1#: My only critique is that this kind of data should be presented in a better-looking manner and the results should be highlighted better as this paves the way for more future correlation between neurological and ocular modalities.

Author’s response: Thank You for the helpful suggestions. To illustrate this point, we added a new figure in the manuscript showing the common origin of cerebral and retinal vessels. (Figure will be uploaded in the required resolution to Manuscript Manager)

Figure 1. Schematic depiction of cerebral and retinal circulation affected of atherosclerotic stenosis of the internal carotid artery. ICA= internal carotid artery; MCA= middle cerebral artery (created with www.biorender.com)

Thank you very much, we agree with the Reviewer comment. Thus, to better highlight the results Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3 have been formally re-edited according to PLOS One table formatting rules: cell shading, arrangement of cell content and heavy gridlines.

________________________________________

Reviewer4#

We would like to thank you for your careful reading and useful comments. We believe they helped to improve the quality of the manuscript. Thank you for your consideration.

Reviewer #4 Point 1#: The prospective nature allows adequate application of study methods on all subjects, however it is quite striking that a study that began with 108 patients ended up with 24 patients only. At this point, it seems plausible that the study may not be sufficiently powered anymore to statistically test the several parameters used by the authors in this study. Please include a section in the statistics paragraph to address this issue.

Author’s response: Yes, indeed, the Reviewer raised an important issue. In response to it we have insert the following text in the revised manuscript: Page 24, line 406: “It is of note that both TCD and OCTA examinations have technical limitations. (1-6) However, it is also considered as the strength of our study, that we applied two very specific non-invasive techniques in the same patients. These, however, came with some limitations, but on the other hand - we believe - it makes our study unique. However, loss of exclusion of patients was mainly due to strict inclusion criteria of the study protocol. Also, 17% of patients decline the examinations, because it would require extended hospital stay.

In addition, the study period coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic affecting Hungary, as well and coinciding with lockdown periods. These factors further reduced the number of potentially eligible patients in the present study.”

As requested by the reviewer the following paragraph was added to the description of statistical methods at page 12 line 203: “The minimum sample size was determined by statistical power calculation (power 0.80; p = 0.05) using data from previous studies at our institution and the method proposed by Hulley et al. for correlation analyzes (8) The minimum number of eyes to be included in this study was calculated to be 22 eyes to provide sufficient power for bivariate correlation analyses.”

However, as the power analysis is only just one aspects of the interpretation of the test results and considering the complexity of the entire study design, we consider our results to be sufficient despite of this limitation, nevertheless, emphasizing that further studies are necessary to generalize the findings of our study.

Reviewer #4 Point 2#: All the parameters used by the authors do not inherently have normative data. In these types of studies, a healthy cohort of patients are usually used to correlate these figures, which the authors did not do in this study. This is particularly important because the authors determined a decrease in vessel density was seen in these atherosclerotic patients, even though a decline in vessel density is usually a normal ageing sign. A comparison to age-matched individuals may help. Please explain the reasoning behind this.

Author’s response: Indeed, the reviewer raised a very logical questions regarding the age and atherosclerosis. Thank you for this useful comment, and to be responsive, the following new data were inserted into the revised manuscript.

Page 23, line 385: “Regarding the OCTA studies previous studies on the same patient group described the decrease of retinal vessel density in this patient group. (9) “

Page 16, line 250: “To contrast these results to healthy vascular system in the present study five age-matched control participants (mean age = 63.2 ± 7.1) with an absence of atherosclerotic carotid artery disease and other major vascular risk factors were recruited. Statistical analysis showed a significant difference in CAR-THRR between the control and study group (Mann-Whitney U test, p=0.045). “

Nevertheless, in the future studies more participants in both the control group and the study group will be investigated, providing a wider applicability of our results.

Reviewer #4 Point 3#: The authors used retina vascular density as a marker of volumetric blood changes during carotid compression and release. Vascular density is usually used as a marker or ischemic changes rather than volume difference. Adjusted flow index may have been a more sensitive marker of blood flow changes, as seen in several papers in the literature. This is evident by the authors' sentence 301 in p. 20 that found no correlation between the cerebral indices and retinal OCT values, which they, rather mistakenly, label "retinal hypoperfusion. Please comment.

Author’s response: Thank you for this comment. Hypoperfusion corresponds to MCA. The retinal vessel density was statical measure, that was correlated with a functional TCD test (CCC test). The OCT device used in the research is not suitable for calculating the adjusted flow index, however, in the future it would really be worthwhile to examine the changes of this parameter in this patient group as well.

The reviewer point is right, thus in order to avoid the potential interference, the CCC test and OCTA evaluation were performed separately. To clarify this, we deleted the term “retinal hypoperfusion” of the revised manuscript.

Reviewer #4 Point 4#: The authors do not report in detail the sizes of the OCTA macular scans they used, as well as the rationale behind dividing the ONH vasculature into papillary and peripapillary, and avoiding 6x6 mm ONH scans. Please explain.

Author’s response: 3x3 mm scans were obtained from the central macular area, which is the smallest scan size among the protocols. We also chose the smallest possible scan size (4.5x4.5 mm) for the peripapillary area, as smaller scans proved to have a higher resolution and are therefore more suitable for quantitative analysis. Previous studies found a decrease of the peripapillary vessel density values in patients with cerebral small vessel disease (10, 11), therefore, in addition to analyzing the vessel density of the whole image we also examined the peripapillary vessel density separately.

Reviewer #4 Point 5#: The authors mention they used a "small vessel identification" software that identified those as less than 35 microns. Please explain the significance of this number and the reasoning behind adding this parameter.

Author’s response: The built in software of the OCT device automatically differentiates the small vessels based on the user manual, vessels smaller than 35 microns are classified in this category. This information is added as supporting information in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer #4 Point 6#: The "cerebrovascular reactivity" and "calculated cerebral arterial resistance" paragraphs in page 15 read more like figure legends and don't necessarily add much to the results section.

Author’s response: Thank you for your recommendation, accordingly we updated the manuscript and the two subheadings have been merged.

In text at page 15 line 223: “Cerebrovascular reactivity and calculated cerebral arterial resistance"

Reviewer #4 Point 7#: The manuscript contains several linguistic and grammar errors, and may benefit from thorough proof-reading.

Author’s response: Thank you for your suggestion, in order to improve the comprehensibility of the text, we had fully revised our manuscript, which was then further corrected by an English proof-reader before re-submission.

References

1. Purkayastha S, Sorond F. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound: technique and application. Semin Neurol. 2012;32(4):411-20.

2. Enders C, Lang GE, Dreyhaupt J, Loidl M, Lang GK, Werner JU. Quantity and quality of image artifacts in optical coherence tomography angiography. PLoS One. 2019;14(1):e0210505.

3. Lee MW, Kim KM, Lim HB, Jo YJ, Kim JY. Repeatability of vessel density measurements using optical coherence tomography angiography in retinal diseases. Br J Ophthalmol. 2018.

4. Lei J, Durbin MK, Shi Y, Uji A, Balasubramanian S, Baghdasaryan E, et al. Repeatability and Reproducibility of Superficial Macular Retinal Vessel Density Measurements Using Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography En Face Images. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2017;135(10):1092-8.

5. Sharma VK, Wong KS, Alexandrov AV. Transcranial Doppler. Front Neurol Neurosci. 2016;40:124-40.

6. Willie CK, Colino FL, Bailey DM, Tzeng YC, Binsted G, Jones LW, et al. Utility of transcranial Doppler ultrasound for the integrative assessment of cerebrovascular function. J Neurosci Methods. 2011;196(2):221-37.

7. Rabiolo A, Gelormini F, Sacconi R, Cicinelli MV, Triolo G, Bettin P, et al. Comparison of methods to quantify macular and peripapillary vessel density in optical coherence tomography angiography. PLoS One. 2018;13(10):e0205773.

8. Hulley SB CS, Browner WS, Grady D, Newman TB. Designing clinical research: an epidemiologic approach. 4th ed. ed. Gaertner R, editor. Philadelphia, PA 19103 USA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, a Wolters Kluwer; 2013. 79 p.

9. István L, Czakó C, Benyó F, Élő Á, Mihály Z, Sótonyi P, et al. The effect of systemic factors on retinal blood flow in patients with carotid stenosis: an optical coherence tomography angiography study. Geroscience. 2022;44(1):389-401.

10. Lee JY, Kim JP, Jang H, Kim J, Kang SH, Kim JS, et al. Optical coherence tomography angiography as a potential screening tool for cerebral small vessel diseases. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2020;12(1):73.

11. Wang X, Wei Q, Wu X, Cao S, Chen C, Zhang J, et al. The vessel density of the superficial retinal capillary plexus as a new biomarker in cerebral small vessel disease: an optical coherence tomography angiography study. Neurol Sci. 2021;42(9):3615-24.

We thank you for your comments and questions you raised. We believe they helped to improve the quality of the manuscript.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely yours,

Rita Magyar-Stang

Semmelweis University,

Department of Neurology

Balassa János Street 6.

1083, Budapest, Hungary

Tel: +36-20/666-3274

E-mail: stang.rita@semmelweis.hu

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reponse to reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Ayman Elnahry

31 Aug 2023

Impaired cerebrovascular reactivity correlates with reduced retinal vessel density in patients with carotid artery stenosis: cross-sectional, single center study

PONE-D-23-12728R1

Dear Dr. Magyar-Stang,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Ayman Elnahry

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Thank you for responding to the reviewers’ comments. Please correct the minor spelling error that the reviewers pointed out in the proof phase of publication.

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

Reviewer #4: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: 266 There is a spelling mistake of OTCA instead of OCTA

Reviewer #4: I think the authors responded well to the comments. I'd still like to point out the typo in page 17, line 266 to be corrected to "OCTA". Otherwise, I don't have more to add.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Fabrizio D'Ascenzo

Reviewer #2: Yes: Amr Wassef

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Ayman Elnahry

6 Sep 2023

PONE-D-23-12728R1

Impaired cerebrovascular reactivity correlates with reduced retinal vessel density in patients with carotid artery stenosis: cross-sectional, single center study

Dear Dr. Magyar-Stang:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Ayman Elnahry

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Checklist. STROBE statement—checklist of items that should be included in reports of observational studies.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Appendix. Transcranial Doppler (TCD) study protocol.

    The text summarizes the technical description of TCD measures.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Appendix. Data processing.

    The text summarizes the software data processing.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Appendix. Common carotid artery compression test.

    The text summarizes the description of the standardized common carotid artery compression test.

    (DOCX)

    S4 Appendix. OCTA small vessel criteria.

    The text summarizes the description of the software-based small vessel definition.

    (DOCX)

    S1 File. Dataset of the study.

    (PDF)

    S2 File. English ethical approval.

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reponse to reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES