ArticleArchives of internal medicine2011
Physician specialty and carotid stenting among elderly medicare beneficiaries in the United States.
Article in Archives of internal medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of Transcarotid vs Transfemoral Carotid Stenting for Stroke Prevention.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- National Patterns of Carotid Revascularization Before and After the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial (CREST).JAMA neurology · 2018Article
- Carotid endarterectomy should not be based on consensus statement duplex velocity criteria.Journal of vascular surgery · 2017Article
- Physician specialty and variation in carotid revascularization technique selected for Medicare patients.Journal of vascular surgery · 2016Article
- Management of Patients with an Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis--Medical Management, Endovascular Treatment, or Carotid Endarterectomy?Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2016Review
- [Treatment reality of internal carotid artery stenosis in Germany : requirement and reality in international comparison and in light of the current S3 guidelines].Der Nervenarzt · 2015Article
- The impact of endovascular repair on specialties performing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.Journal of vascular surgery · 2015Article
- Medical and Revascularization Therapies for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2015Review
- Asymptomatic carotid stenosis: immediate revascularization or watchful waiting?Current cardiology reports · 2014Review
- Effect of hospital-level variation in the use of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy on perioperative stroke and death in asymptomatic patients.Journal of vascular surgery · 2013Article
- Why the United States Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) should not extend reimbursement indications for carotid artery angioplasty/stenting.Brain and behavior · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe use of carotid stenting is rising across the United States. How physician specialty relates to its utilization rates or outcomes is uncertain.
methodsWe performed an observational analysis of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older undergoing carotid stenting between 2005 and 2007 in 306 hospital referral regions (HRRs). We first determined how frequently carotid stenting was performed by different specialists within each HRR and then used multivariable regression models to compare population-based utilization rates and 30-day outcomes for this procedure across HRRs based on the proportion performed by cardiologists, surgeons, radiologists, or a mix of specialists.
resultsIn 272 HRRs where at least 15 procedures were performed during the study period, we identified 28 700 carotid stenting procedures performed by 2588 operators. While cardiologists made up approximately one-third of these operators, they were responsible for 14 919 (52.0%) procedures. Significant differences were noted in the characteristics of patients treated by cardiologists compared with other specialties, including higher rates of invasive cardiac procedures and lower rates of acute stroke or transient ischemic attacks in the 180 days prior to carotid stenting. Population-based utilization rates were significantly higher in HRRs where cardiologists performed most procedures relative to HRRs where most were done by other specialists or a mix of specialists (P < .001). In contrast, risk-standardized outcomes did not differ across HRRs based on physician specialty.
conclusionsCarotid stenting is being performed by operators from diverse specialties. Hospital referral regions where cardiologists perform most procedures have higher population-based utilization rates with similar outcomes.
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.