ArticleBrain and behavior2018
Immediate and late outcomes of stenting for severe extracranial internal carotid artery stenosis in octogenarian patients.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcomes of Symptomatic Extracranial Carotid Artery Stenting in Octogenarians: A Single-Center Retrospective Study on Restenosis, Risk Factors, and Complications.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Anatomical Considerations for Endovascular Intervention for Extracranial Carotid Disease: A Review of the Literature and Recommended Guidelines.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Immediate and late outcomes of stenting for severe extracranial internal carotid artery stenosis in octogenarian patients.Brain and behavior · 2018Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Multiple studies suggest that internal carotid artery stenting can be performed safely in octogenarians with low periprocedural complication rates. However, great concern still exists as to whether these patients will gain long-term benefits from this procedure given their advanced age and uncertain life expectancy. We decided to conduct a retrospective study to determine short-and long-term clinical outcomes and to analyze survival duration in this population. Methods and Results: Sixty-nine consecutive elderly patients with either symptomatic or asymptomatic stenosis ≥70% underwent 86 procedures. Immediate and late outcomes, as well as survival data, were analyzed retrospectively. Mean age was 83.1 ± 2.7 years. Mean survival was 49.3 ± 10.1 months. A complete neurological assessment was obtained at 1 and 2 years in 100% of patients, at 3 years in 90.7% of patients and at 5 years in 84.8% of patients. Two major and one minor ischemic strokes occurred during the periprocedural period. No death, myocardial infarction or intracranial hemorrhage was recorded. The mean follow-up period was 55.4 ± 24.6 months. Four patients experienced a minimum of 1 year of follow-up, and the longest is 8 years. Among the patients with the longest follow-up time, 6 had ischemic strokes, of which 2 were fatal. In total, 17 deaths occurred. Four patients experienced dementia without stroke. Survival at 3 and 5 years was estimated to be 90% and 73%, respectively. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that stenting in octogenarians was safe and effective during the periprocedural period. Long-term follow-up showed a low rate of fatal and nonfatal stroke, and patients survived long enough to benefit from the procedure. However, it was associated with a relatively high rate of long-term event. Though carotid artery stenting is a minimally invasive procedure, it should still be performed with great caution and only in carefully selected patients. The present study suggested that in this age population, carotid artery stenting might be considered as a revascularization option.
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.