Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29503393›Full record

ArticleNeurologia medico-chirurgica2018

Treatment Strategy Based on Plaque Vulnerability and the Treatment Risk Evaluation for Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis.

Yoshiro Ito, Wataro Tsuruta, Yasunobu Nakai, Tomoji Takigawa, Aiki Marushima, Tomohiko Masumoto, Yuji Matsumaru, Eiichi Ishikawa, Akira Matsumura

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 2018. 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
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yoshiro ItoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba.
Wataro TsurutaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba.
Yasunobu NakaiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Tsukuba Medical Center Hospital.
Tomoji TakigawaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba.
Aiki MarushimaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba.
Tomohiko MasumotoDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba.
Yuji MatsumaruDivision for Stroke, Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba.
Eiichi IshikawaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba.
Akira MatsumuraDepartment of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba.
University of Tsukuba · JPTsukuba Medical Center Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) are not appropriate treatment procedure for internal carotid artery stenosis (ICAS) in some patients. The importance of plaque vulnerability and the treatment risk evaluation has been reported. We analyzed whether treatment selection contributes to the outcome. We retrospectively examined 121 patients who underwent CEA or CAS. Treatment was selected based on plaque vulnerability and the treatment risk evaluation. We selected CAS for patients with stable plaques and CEA for patients with unstable plaques, and considered the other treatment for high-risk patients. The patients were classified as the stable plaque (Stable: n = 42), the unstable plaque and CEA low risk (Unstable/Low: n = 30), and the CEA high-risk (Unstable/High: n = 49). Frequency of perioperative stroke, myocardial infarction, death, and systemic complications was examined. CEA and CAS were performed in 35 and 86 patients, respectively. One patient (2.9%) had a stroke in CEA and five patients (5.8%) in CAS (P = 0.50). Systemic complications were observed in two patients (5.7%) in CEA and six (7.1%) in CAS (P = 0.80). There were no differences in stroke (Stable; 2.4%, Unstable/Low; 3.2%, and Unstable/High; 8.2%) and systemic complications (Stable; 9.5%, Unstable/Low; 3.3%, and Unstable/High; 6.1%) among three groups (P = 0.44 and P = 0.59, respectively). The treatment selection based on plaque vulnerability and the treatment risk evaluation could provide good treatment outcome for high-risk patients. It is ideal to select an appropriate treatment for ICAS by one neurovascular team.

Indexed as

Carotid Artery, InternalEndarterectomy, CarotidPatient SelectionStentsAgedAged, 80 and overCarotid StenosisCerebral AngiographyFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedPlaque, AtheroscleroticRetrospective StudiesRisk Assessmentcarotid artery stentingcarotid endarterectomyinternal carotid artery stenosisplaque vulnerabilitytreatment risk evaluations

Identifiers

PMID29503393
PMCPMC5958040
OpenAlexW2792722838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.