Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15106144›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2004

Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.

K Rerkasem, R Bond, P M Rothwell

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Randomized controlled trials: still the backbone of vascular surgery?Gefasschirurgie : Zeitschrift fur vaskulare und endovaskulare Chirurgie : Organ der Deutschen und der Osterreichischen Gesellschaft fur Gefasschirurgie unter Mitarbeit der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft fur Gefasschirurgie
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

K Rerkasem
R Bond
P M Rothwell
Chiang Mai University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCarotid endarterectomy reduces the risk of stroke in people with recently symptomatic, severe carotid artery stenosis. However, there are significant perioperative risks which may be lessened by performing the operation under local rather than general anaesthetic.

objectivesThe aim of this review was to assess the risks of endarterectomy under local compared with general anaesthetic. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Stroke Group trials register (April 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2003), EMBASE (1980 to 2002), and Index to Scientific and Technical Proceedings (1980 to 1994). We handsearched 13 relevant journals up to 2002, and searched the reference lists of articles identified. We also advertised the review in Vascular News (a newspaper for European vascular specialists) in August 2001. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials and non-randomised studies comparing carotid endarterectomy under local versus general anaesthetic. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One reviewer selected studies for inclusion and another independently checked the decisions. Two reviewers assessed trial quality and independently extracted the data. MAIN

resultsSeven randomised trials involving 554 operations, and 41 non-randomised studies involving 25622 operations were included. The methodological quality of the non-randomised trials was questionable. Eleven of the non-randomised studies were prospective and 29 reported on a consecutive series of patients. In nine non-randomised studies the number of arteries, as opposed to the number of patients, was unclear. Meta-analysis of the non-randomised studies showed that the use of local anaesthetic was associated with significant reductions in the odds of death (35 studies), stroke (31 studies), stroke or death (26 studies), myocardial infarction (22 studies), and pulmonary complications (7 studies), within 30 days of the operation. Meta-analysis of the randomised studies showed that the use of local anaesthetic was associated with a significant reduction in local haemorrhage (OR = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.12 to 0.79) within 30 days of the operation, but there was no evidence of a reduction in the odds of operative stroke. However, the trials were too small to allow reliable conclusions to be drawn, and in some studies intention-to-treat analyses were not possible because of exclusions. REVIEWERS'

conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence from randomised trials comparing carotid endarterectomy performed under local and general anaesthetic. Non-randomised studies suggest potential benefits with the use of local anaesthetic, but these studies may be biased. More randomised studies are needed.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, GeneralAnesthesia, LocalEndarterectomy, CarotidClinical Trials as TopicHumans

Identifiers

PMID15106144
OpenAlexW4245910430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.