ArticleElectronic physician2018
Carotid arterial stent implantation follow-up and results in 50 patients: preliminary report.
Article in Electronic physician, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence for the Benefits of Melatonin in Cardiovascular Disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- An Ultrasound Model to Predict the Short-Term Effects of Endovascular Stent Placement in the Treatment of Carotid Artery Stenosis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCarotid artery stenting (CAS) is considered as a safe and effective procedure for treatment of carotid artery stenosis. Evaluation of this procedure's complications is essential for proper clinical decision-making.
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the cardiovascular events after CAS among our patients in Isfahan, Iran.
methodsThis case-series study was conducted on fifty patients from December 2013 to May 2016. These patients were referred to the cardiology centers of Isfahan, Iran by a neurologist, for stenting of extracranial carotid arteries. The second step was examining the patients by cardiac interventionist. Stenting was performed on symptomatic patients with carotid artery stenosis of more than 50 percent or asymptomatic patients with more than 70 percent carotid artery stenosis on Doppler ultrasonography. Neurologic evaluation was performed at baseline, during hospital stay, and follow-up. Transient ischemic attack (TIA)/Stroke and Myocardial infarction (MI) questionnaires were filled out by a cardiologist over telephone interviews with the patients, for follow-up of one month, six months and at the end of study. Carotid Doppler ultrasonography was performed before and 6 months after stenting for evaluation of restenosis. Indeed, during the follow-up study, the major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were evaluated. All data were analyzed through SPSS v.17.
resultsThe mean age of patients was 70.73 (±14.01) years old (range: 48-89 years old). Composite endpoint of death, stroke, and MI was totally 8 percent. The rate of carotid arterial restenosis (Luminal arterial narrowing>50%) was 8%.
conclusionsDespite the fact that carotid stenting is new in our center, our results can be compared to other important studies.
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.