ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2012
Effect of cilostazol in preventing restenosis after carotid artery stenting using the carotid wallstent: a multicenter retrospective study.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of cilostazol for in-stent restenosis after carotid artery stenting: a meta-analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of carotid endarterectomy and repeated carotid angioplasty and stenting for in-stent restenosis (CERCAS trial): a randomised study.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2023Trial
- Effect of triple versus dual antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous intervention: systematic review and meta-analysis with GRADE system.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Antithrombotic Therapy in Carotid Artery and Intracranial Artery Stent.Journal of neuroendovascular therapy · 2025Review
- Current Status of Carotid Artery Stenting.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 2024Review
- A Case of Intraprocedural Plaque Protrusion during Carotid Artery Stenting Using the Stent-in-Stent Technique for Carotid Artery Stenosis with Unstable Plaque.Journal of neuroendovascular therapy · 2022Article
- Treatment of In-Stent Stenosis Following Flow Diversion of Intracranial Aneurysms with Cilostazol and Clopidogrel.Neurointervention · 2021Article
- Open-Label Phase I Clinical Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Cilostazol in Patients Undergoing Internal Carotid Artery Stent Placement.Interventional neurology · 2017Article
- Antiplatelet therapy for carotid artery stenting.Interventional neurology · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeRestenosis after CAS is a postoperative problem, with a reported frequency of approximately 2%-8%. However differences in stent design, procedure, and the antiplatelet agent appear to affect the incidence of restenosis. We assessed the frequency of restenosis and the effect of the antiplatelet agent CLZ in preventing restenosis after CAS by the standard procedure using the CWS. MATERIALS AND
methodsBetween May 2010 and October 2011, 62 lesions in 60 consecutive patients underwent CAS using the CWS at 4 medical institutions, and all patients were followed clinically and assessed by sonography, 3D-CTA, or angiography at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Restenosis was defined as ≥50% stenosis. The incidence of restenosis and the variation in the incidence of restenosis by the difference in type of antiplatelet agent between the CLZ group (n = 30; aspirin, 100 mg, and CLZ, 200 mg) and the non-CLZ group (n = 32; aspirin, 100 mg, and clopidogrel, 75 mg [n = 29]; or ticlopidine, 100 mg [n = 2] or 200 mg [n = 1]) were retrospectively investigated. Two antiplatelet agents were given starting 1 week preoperatively until at least 3 months postoperatively.
resultsRestenosis occurred in 5 patients (8.3%), but all were cases of asymptomatic lesions in the follow-up period. All 5 patients with restenosis were in the non-CLZ group, with no cases of restenosis in the CLZ group; the difference was significant (P = .0239).
conclusionsThe restenosis rate after CAS by using the CWS was 8.3%. CLZ was associated with significant inhibition of restenosis.
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.