Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28495538›Full record

ArticleAnnals of vascular surgery2017

Clinical Outcome of Carotid Artery Stenting According to Provider Specialty and Volume.

Ali F AbuRahma, John E Campbell, Nizar Hariri, Joseph AbuRahma, L Scott Dean, Mark C Bates, Aravinda Nanjundappa, Patrick A Stone, Ace O'vil

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of vascular surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. CASSH Registry: Rationale and Study Design.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ali F AbuRahmaCharleston Area Medical Center Vascular Center of Excellence, Charleston, WV; Department of Surgery, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV. Electronic address: ali.aburahma@camc.org.
John E CampbellDepartment of Surgery, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV.
Nizar HaririDepartment of Surgery, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV.
Joseph AbuRahmaDepartment of Surgery, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV.
L Scott DeanCAMC Health Education and Research Institute, Charleston, WV.
Mark C BatesCharleston Area Medical Center Vascular Center of Excellence, Charleston, WV; Department of Surgery, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV.
Aravinda NanjundappaDepartment of Surgery, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV.
Patrick A StoneDepartment of Surgery, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV.
Ace O'vilDepartment of Surgery, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV.

Funding

West Virginia IDEA-CTRU54GM104942 · NIGMS · WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY · PI Sally Lynn Hodder · 2012 to 2026
$81.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM104942
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral studies have demonstrated better outcomes for carotid endarterectomy with high-volume hospitals and providers. However, only a few studies have reported on the impact of operator specialty/volume on the perioperative outcome of carotid artery stenting (CAS). This study will analyze the correlation of CAS outcomes and provider specialty and volume.

methodsProspectively collected data of CAS procedures done at our institution during a 10-year period were analyzed. Major adverse events (MAEs; 30-day stroke, myocardial infarction, and death) were compared according to provider specialty (vascular surgeons [VSs], interventional cardiologists [ICs], interventional radiologists [IRs], interventional vascular medicine [IVM]), and volume (≥5 CAS/year vs. <5 CAS/year).

resultsFour hundred fourteen CAS procedures (44% for symptomatic indications) were analyzed. Demographics/clinical characteristics were somewhat similar between specialties. MAE rates were not significantly different between various specialties: 3.1% for IC, 6.3% for VS, 7.1% for IR, 6.7% for IVM (P = 0.3121; 6.3% for VS and 3.8% for others combined, P = 0.2469). When physicians with <5 CAS/year were excluded: the MAE rates were 3.1% for IC, 4.7% for VS, and 6.7% for IVM (P = 0.5633). When VS alone were compared with others, and physicians with <5 CAS/year were excluded, the MAE rates were 4.7% for VS vs. 3.6% for non-VS (P = 0.5958). The MAE rates for low-volume providers, regardless of their specialty, were 9.5% vs. 4% for high-volume providers (P = 0.1002). Logistic regression analysis showed that the odds ratio of MAE was 0.4 (0.15-1.1, P = 0.0674) for high-volume providers, while the odds ratio for VS was 1.3 (0.45-3.954, P = 0.5969).

conclusionsPerioperative MAE rates for CAS were similar between various providers, regardless of specialties, particularly for vascular surgeons with similar volume to nonvascular surgeons. Low-volume providers had higher MAE rates.

Indexed as

CardiologistsProcess Assessment, Health CareRadiologistsSpecializationStentsSurgeonsWorkloadAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarotid Artery DiseasesEndovascular ProceduresFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMale

Identifiers

PMID28495538
PMCPMC5610628

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.