Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30365684›Full record

ReviewArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2018

Risk-Benefit Assessment of Carotid Revascularization.

Pedro Piccaro de Oliveira, José Luiz da Costa Vieira, Raphael Boesche Guimarães, Eduardo Dytz Almeida, Simone Louise Savaris, Vera Lucia Portal

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pedro Piccaro de OliveiraInstituto de Cardiologia - Fundação Universitária de Cardiologia (IC/FUC), Porto Alegre, RS - Brazil.
José Luiz da Costa VieiraInstituto de Cardiologia - Fundação Universitária de Cardiologia (IC/FUC), Porto Alegre, RS - Brazil.
Raphael Boesche GuimarãesInstituto de Cardiologia - Fundação Universitária de Cardiologia (IC/FUC), Porto Alegre, RS - Brazil.
Eduardo Dytz AlmeidaInstituto de Cardiologia - Fundação Universitária de Cardiologia (IC/FUC), Porto Alegre, RS - Brazil.
Simone Louise SavarisInstituto de Cardiologia - Fundação Universitária de Cardiologia (IC/FUC), Porto Alegre, RS - Brazil.
Vera Lucia PortalInstituto de Cardiologia - Fundação Universitária de Cardiologia (IC/FUC), Porto Alegre, RS - Brazil.
Fundação Universitária de Cardiologia · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Severe carotid atherosclerotic disease is responsible for 14% of all strokes, which result in a high rate of morbidity and mortality. In recent years, advances in clinical treatment of cardiovascular diseases have resulted in a significant decrease in mortality due to these causes. To review the main studies on carotid revascularization, evaluating the relationship between risks and benefits of this procedure. The data reviewed show that, for a net benefit, carotid intervention should only be performed in cases of a periprocedural risk of less than 6% in symptomatic patients. The medical therapy significantly reduced the revascularization net benefit ratio for stroke prevention in asymptomatic patients. Real life registries indicate that carotid stenting is associated with a greater periprocedural risk. The operator annual procedure volume and patient age has an important influence in the rate of stroke and death after carotid stenting. Symptomatic patients have a higher incidence of death and stroke after the procedure. Revascularization has the greatest benefit in the first weeks of the event. There is a discrepancy in the scientific literature about carotid revascularization and/or clinical treatment, both in primary and secondary prevention of patients with carotid artery injury. The identification of patients who will really benefit is a dynamic process subject to constant review.

Indexed as

Risk AssessmentStentsAngioplastyCarotid ArteriesCarotid StenosisEndarterectomy, CarotidHumansRisk FactorsStrokeTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID30365684
PMCPMC6199518
OpenAlexW2893156787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.