Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20045609›Full record

ArticleJournal of vascular surgery2010

Protamine reduces bleeding complications associated with carotid endarterectomy without increasing the risk of stroke.

David H Stone, Brian W Nolan, Andres Schanzer, Philip P Goodney, Robert A Cambria, Donald S Likosky, Daniel B Walsh, Jack L Cronenwett, Vascular Study Group of Northern New England

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vascular surgery, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Safe carotid endarterectomy: "one fits all strategy".Kardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

David H StoneSection of Vascular Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA. David.H.Stone@Hitchcock.org
Brian W Nolan
Andres Schanzer
Philip P Goodney
Robert A Cambria
Donald S Likosky
Daniel B Walsh
Jack L Cronenwett
Vascular Study Group of Northern New England
Dartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center · USDartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice · USEastern Maine Medical Center · USUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · US

Funding

Understanding Variation in Treatment Intensity with Lower Extremity PADK08HL105676 · NHLBI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI GOODNEY, PHILIP P · 2010 to 2014
$700k
NHLBI NIH HHS K08 HL105676
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesControversy persists regarding the use of protamine during carotid endarterectomy (CEA) based on prior conflicting reports documenting both reduced bleeding as well as increased stroke risk. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of protamine reversal of heparin anticoagulation on the outcome of CEA in a contemporary multistate registry.

methodsWe reviewed a prospective regional registry of 4587 CEAs in 4311 patients performed by 66 surgeons from 11 centers in Northern New England from 2003-2008. Protamine use varied by surgeon (38% routine use, 44% rare use, 18% selective use). Endpoints were postoperative bleeding requiring reoperation as well as potential thrombotic complications, including stroke, death, and myocardial infarction (MI). Predictors of endpoints were determined by multivariate logistic regression after associated variables were identified by univariate analysis.

resultsOf the 4587 CEAs performed, 46% utilized protamine, while 54% did not. Fourteen patients (0.64%) in the protamine-treated group required reoperation for bleeding compared with 42 patients (1.66%) in the untreated cohort (P = .001). Protamine use did not affect the rate of MI (1.1% vs 0.91%, P = .51), stroke (0.78% vs 1.15%, P = .2), or death (0.23% vs 0.32%, P = .57) between treated and untreated patients, respectively. By multivariate analysis, protamine (odds ratio [OR] 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17-0.63; P = .001) and patch angioplasty (OR 0.46, 95% CI, 0.26-0.81; P = .007) were independently associated with diminished reoperation for bleeding. A single center was associated with a significantly higher rate of reoperation for bleeding (OR 6.47, 95% CI, 3.02-13.9; P < .001). Independent of protamine use, consequences of reoperation for bleeding were significant, with a four-fold increase in MI, a seven-fold increase in stroke, and a 30-fold increase in death.

conclusionProtamine reduced serious bleeding requiring reoperation during CEA without increasing the risk of MI, stroke, or death, in this large, contemporary registry. In light of significant complications referable to bleeding, liberal use of protamine during CEA appears warranted.

Indexed as

AgedEndarterectomy, CarotidFemaleHeparin AntagonistsHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMyocardial InfarctionNew EnglandOdds RatioPostoperative HemorrhageProspective StudiesProtaminesRegistriesReoperationRisk AssessmentHeparin AntagonistsProtamines

Identifiers

PMID20045609
PMCPMC5240820
OpenAlexW2138573602

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.