ReviewInterventional neurology2015
The development of carotid stent material.
Review in Interventional neurology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- One-Year Outcomes of CGuard Double Mesh Stent in Carotid Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Pooled it
- (In)comparability of Carotid Artery Stent Characteristics: A Systematic Review on Assessment and Comparison with Manufacturer Data.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2020Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of stenting for elderly patients with severe and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis: a critical meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Clinical interventions in aging · 2015Pooled it
- Article
- Commentary on a case report and literature review of acute carotid stent thrombosis.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Article
- Association between high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and/or microembolic signals after carotid angioplasty and stenting.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2019Article
- Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Interventional Neuroradiology.Clinical neuroradiology · 2018Article
- Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting and Embolic Protection.Current cardiology reports · 2017Review
- Transcervical access, reversal of flow and mesh-covered stents: New options in the armamentarium of carotid artery stenting.World journal of cardiology · 2017Review
- Techniques in Vascular and Interventional Radiology Drug Delivery Technologies in the Superficial Femoral Artery.Techniques in vascular and interventional radiology · 2016Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endovascular angioplasty with stenting is a promising option for treating carotid artery stenosis. There exist a rapidly increasing number of different stent types with different materials. The bare-metal stent is the most commonly used stent with acceptable results, but it leaves us with the problems of thrombosis and restenosis. The drug-eluting stent is a breakthrough as it has the ability to reduce the restenosis rate, but the problem of late thrombosis still has to be addressed. The biodegradable stent disappears after having served its function. However, restenosis and degradation rates remain to be studied. In this article, we review every stent material with its characteristics, clinical results and complications and point out the standards of an ideal carotid stent.
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.