ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2010
Indications and applications for extracranial carotid artery stent placement.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Treatment of high-grade symptomatic carotid stenosis via carotid endarterectomy has been shown to be superior to medical management alone in several studies. Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) has emerged as an alternative approach to endarterectomy to reduce the associated perioperative risks. Several anatomic and physiologic factors that increase the risk of stroke and/or death associated with endarterectomy have been identified. The alternative approach of CAS has been found to be noninferior to endarterectomy for high surgical risk patients with severe symptomatic carotid stenosis and the use of this procedure is supported by the current widely accepted guidelines. In patients with standard surgical risk, the differential benefit of CAS compared with endarterectomy is not clear. Several advantages of CAS have been identified in previous studies in selected patients. The results of CAS will undoubtedly continue to improve with advances in device designs, technological expertise, and appropriate patient selection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.