ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2019
Effect of aortic arch type on technical indicators in patients undergoing carotid artery stenting.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Transradial versus transfemoral access in carotid artery stenting: A meta-analysis.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2026Pooled it
- Transradial artery access for carotid artery stenting: A pooled analysis.The neuroradiology journal · 2024Pooled it
- Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Radial or Femoral Access for Carotid Stenting.Clinical neuroradiology · 2024Pooled it
- Age-Related Anatomical Changes in Carotid Artery Stenosis and Its Impact on Postoperative Complications in Stenting and Endarterectomy.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2025Article
- Transradial Approach for Neurovascular Interventions : A Literature Review.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2025Article
- Article
- Carotid Artery Stenting Outcomes by Neurointerventional Surgeons (CASONI).Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- 3D Characterization of the Aortic Valve and Aortic Arch in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Patients.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2024Article
- Effects of percutaneous endovascular angioplasty for severe stenosis or occlusion of subclavian artery.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Patient-Specific 3D-Print Extracranial Vascular Simulators and Infrared Imaging Platform for Diagnostic Cerebral Angiography Training.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Clinical Outcomes of Second- versus First-Generation Carotid Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Efficacy of the MRA-Based Road Mapping of the Para-Aortic Access Route before Mechanical Thrombectomy in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke.Cerebrovascular diseases extra · 2022Article
- Carotid Artery Stenting Using the Snake Hunt Technique for Highly Tortuous Carotid Artery Stenosis: A Technical Note.NMC case report journal · 2021Article
- Anatomical Considerations for Endovascular Intervention for Extracranial Carotid Disease: A Review of the Literature and Recommended Guidelines.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Comparison of Transfemoral Cerebral Angiography and Transradial Cerebral Angiography Following a Shift in Practice During Four Years at a Single Center in China.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study was performed to explore the effect of the aortic arch type on technical indicators in patients undergoing carotid artery stenting (CAS).
methodsThe data of 224 consecutive patients who underwent unilateral CAS from January 2011 to December 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. The requirement for placement of the guiding catheter into the common carotid artery with assistance of an angiographic catheter, fluoroscopy time, contrast agent dose, and adverse events were recorded.
resultsThe fluoroscopy time was significantly longer and the contrast agent dose was significantly higher in patients with Type III than Type I and II arches. Significantly more patients with Type III than Type I and II arches required placement of the guiding catheter with assistance of an angiographic catheter (46.2% vs. 15.0%, respectively). The procedural success rate was significantly lower in patients with Type III than Type I and II arches (96.2% vs. 100.0%, respectively). The incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and all types of stroke was significantly higher in patients with Type III than Type I and II arches (7.7% vs. 1.7%, respectively).
conclusionsThe aortic arch type is an important influential factor in CAS. Type III arches are associated with more difficulties and complications.
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.