Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15319725›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery2004

Carotid endarterectomy at the millennium: what interventional therapy must match.

Glenn M LaMuraglia, David C Brewster, Ashby C Moncure, David J Dorer, Michael C Stoner, Samir K Trehan, Elizabeth C Drummond, William M Abbott, Richard P Cambria

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02808754 (Remote Ischemic Preconditioning for Carotid Endarterectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT02808754 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Remote Ischemic Preconditioning for Carotid Endarterectomy

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of PittsburghRan2016 to 2019Enrolled86ConditionsCarotid Stenosis, Endarterectomy, CarotidArmsRemote Ischemic Preconditioning
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Body Mass Index and Late Adverse Outcomes after a Carotid Endarterectomy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Carotid Endarterectomy: experience in 8743 cases.HSR proceedings in intensive care & cardiovascular anesthesia · 2009
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Glenn M LaMuragliaDivision of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery of the General Surgical Services, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston 02114, USA. glamuraglia@partners.org
David C Brewster
Ashby C Moncure
David J Dorer
Michael C Stoner
Samir K Trehan
Elizabeth C Drummond
William M Abbott
Richard P Cambria

Funding

Medical Research Council G0500987
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesCarotid endarterectomy (CEA) is supported by level 1 evidence as the standard treatment of severe carotid stenosis in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. As interventional techniques are emerging for treatment of this disease, this study was undertaken to provide a contemporary surgical standard for comparison to carotid stenting. PATIENTS AND

methodsDuring the interval 1989 to 1999, 2236 isolated CEAs were performed on 1897 patients (62% male, 36% symptomatic, 4.6% reoperative procedures). Study endpoints included perioperative events, patient survival, late incidence of stroke, anatomic durability of CEA, and resource utilization changes during the study. Variables associated with complications, long-term and stroke free survival, restenosis, and resource utilization were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis.

resultsPerioperative complications occurred in 5.5% of CEA procedures, including any stroke/death (1.4%), neck hematoma (1.7%), cardiac complications (0.5%), and cranial nerve injury (0.4%). Actuarial survival at 5 and 10 years was 72.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 69.3-73.5) and 44.7% (95% CI 41.7-47.9) respectively, with coronary artery disease (P < 0.0018), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P < 0.00018) and diabetes mellitus (P < 0.0011) correlating with decreased longevity. The age- and sex-adjusted incidence of any stroke during follow-up was reduced by 22% (upper 0.35, lower 0.08) of predicted with the patient classification of hyperlipidemia (P < 0.0045) as the only protective factor. Analysis of CEA anatomic durability during a median follow-up period of 5.9 years identified a 7.7% failure rate (severe restenosis/occlusion, 4.5%; or reoperative CEA, 3.2%) with elevated serum cholesterol (P < 0.017) correlating with early restenosis. Resource utilization diminished (first versus last 2-year interval periods) for average hospital length of stay from 10.3 +/- 1.5 days to 4.3 +/- 0.7 days (P < 0.01) and preoperative contrast angiography from 87% +/- 1.4% to 10.3% +/- 4%.

conclusionsThese data delineate the safety, durability, and effectiveness in long-term stroke prevention of CEA. They provide a standard to which emerging catheter-based therapies for carotid stenosis should be compared.

Indexed as

Endarterectomy, CarotidAgedAngioplasty, BalloonCarotid StenosisFemaleHumansMaleRisk FactorsStentsStrokeSurvival RateTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID15319725
PMCPMC1356444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.