ArticleJournal of neurology2011
Factors associated with time delay to carotid stenting in patients with a symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2011. 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, 7 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Treatment of a symptomatic stenosis is known to be most beneficial within 14 days after the presenting event but this can frequently not be achieved in daily practice. The aim of this study was the assessment of factors responsible for this time delay to treatment. A retrospective analysis of a prospective two-center CAS database was carried out to investigate the potential factors that influence a delayed CAS treatment. Of 374 patients with a symptomatic carotid stenosis, 59.1% were treated beyond ≥14 days. A retinal TIA event (OR = 3.59, 95% CI 1.47-8.74, p < 0.01) was found to be a predictor for a delayed treatment, whereas the year of the intervention (OR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.20-0.50, p < 0.01) and a contralateral carotid occlusion (OR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.21-0.86, p = 0.02) were predictive of an early treatment. Similarly, within the subgroup of patients with transient symptoms, the year of the intervention (OR = 0.28, 95% CI 0.14-0.59, p < 0.01) was associated with an early treatment, whereas a retinal TIA as the qualifying event (OR = 6.96, 95% CI 2.37-20.47, p < 0.01) was associated with a delayed treatment. Treatment delay was most pronounced in patients with an amaurosis fugax, whereas a contralateral carotid occlusion led to an early intervention. Although CAS is increasingly performed faster in the last years, there is still scope for an even more accelerated treatment strategy, which might prevent future recurrent strokes prior to treatment.
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.