Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29740506›Full record

ReviewSurgical neurology international2018

Carotid artery stenting vs. carotid endarterectomy in the management of carotid artery stenosis: Lessons learned from randomized controlled trials.

Mohamed M Salem, Abdulrahman Y Alturki, Matthew R Fusco, Ajith J Thomas, Bob S Carter, Clark C Chen, Ekkehard M Kasper

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Surgical neurology international, 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
–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. Trial
  2. Review
  3. White matter hyperintensity determines ischemic stroke severity in symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Dysregulation Serum miR-19a-3p is a Diagnostic Biomarker for Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis and a Promising Predictor of Cerebral Ischemia Events.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    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

7 authors.

Mohamed M SalemDivision of Neurosurgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abdulrahman Y AlturkiDivision of Neurosurgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Matthew R FuscoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Ajith J ThomasDivision of Neurosurgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Bob S CarterDepartment of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Clark C ChenDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Ekkehard M KasperDivision of Neurosurgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCarotid artery stenosis, both symptomatic and asymptomatic, has been well studied with several multicenter randomized trials. The superiority of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to medical therapy alone in both symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis has been well established in previous trials in the 1990s. The consequent era of endovascular carotid artery stenting (CAS) has offered another option for treating carotid artery stenosis. A series of randomized trials have now been conducted to compare CEA and CAS in the treatment of carotid artery disease. The large number of similar trials has created some confusion due to inconsistent results. Here, the authors review the trials that compare CEA and CAS in the management of carotid artery stenosis.

methodsThe PubMed database was searched systematically for randomized controlled trials published in English that compared CEA and CAS. Only human studies on adult patients were assessed. The references of identified articles were reviewed for additional manuscripts to be included if inclusion criteria were met. The following terms were used during search: carotid stenosis, endarterectomy, stenting. Retrospective or single-center studies were excluded from the review.

resultsThirteen reports of seven large-scale prospective multicenter studies, comparing both interventions for symptomatic or asymptomatic extracranial carotid artery stenosis, were identified.

conclusionsWhile the superiority of intervention to medical management for symptomatic patients has been well established in the literatures, careful selection of asymptomatic patients for intervention should be undertaken and only be pursued after institution of appropriate medical therapy until further reports on trials comparing medical therapy to intervention in this patient group are available.

Indexed as

Asymptomaticstrokesymptomatictransient ischemic attack

Identifiers

PMID29740506
PMCPMC5926211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.