SynthesisScientific reports2018
Systematic review and network meta-analysis of treatment strategies for asymptomatic carotid disease.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patch angioplasty versus primary closure for carotid endarterectomy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Comparative Lipid-Lowering/Increasing Efficacy of 7 Statins in Patients with Dyslipidemia, Cardiovascular Diseases, or Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analyses of 50 Randomized Controlled Trials.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2020 · on this mapPooled it
- Medical Management and Revascularization for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis.The New England journal of medicine · 2026Trial
- [Stent angioplasty for internal carotid artery stenosis].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Article
- Prevention and Treatment of Acute Stroke in the Nonagenarians and Beyond: Medical and Ethical Issues.Current treatment options in neurology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aim to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate outcomes of treatment strategies for asymptomatic carotid disease. We searched electronic bibliographic sources (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL) to identify randomised controlled trials (RCT) reporting comparative outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA), carotid stenting (CAS) and best medical therapy (BMT) in asymptomatic carotid disease. We performed pairwise meta-analysis applying random or fixed-effects models and reported the results as the odds ratio (OR) or risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We also performed a network meta-analysis and obtained a hierarchy of the competing interventions using rankograms and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and mean ranks. Stroke and death within 30 days and during follow up were the primary outcome endpoints. Eleven RCTs were identified reporting a total of 8,954 patients. Compared to BMT, CEA reduces the odds of long-term mortality (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.43, 1.12) and ipsilateral stroke (OR 0.59 95% CI 0.50, 0.71). Network meta-analyses league table demonstrated that BMT is superior to CEA and CAS in terms of perioperative stroke risk and mortality. CEA is the preferred method to reduce the long-term risk of ipsilateral stroke and mortality for patients with asymptomatic carotid disease.
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.