Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30872422›Full record

ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2019

Flow Patterns in Carotid Webs: A Patient-Based Computational Fluid Dynamics Study.

K C J Compagne, K Dilba, E J Postema, A C G M van Es, B J Emmer, C B L M Majoie, W H van Zwam, D W J Dippel, J J Wentzel, A van der Lugt and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Safety and efficacy of staged bilateral carotid artery stenting for bilateral carotid webs.Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

K C J CompagneFrom the Departments of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine (K.C.J.C., K.D., A.C.G.M.v.E., A.v.d.L.).ORCID 0000-0003-0608-835X
K DilbaFrom the Departments of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine (K.C.J.C., K.D., A.C.G.M.v.E., A.v.d.L.).ORCID 0000-0002-7349-0894
E J PostemaBiomedical Engineering (K.D., E.J.P., J.J.W., F.J.H.G.), Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0752-1277
A C G M van EsFrom the Departments of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine (K.C.J.C., K.D., A.C.G.M.v.E., A.v.d.L.).ORCID 0000-0001-6119-7247
B J EmmerDepartment of Radiology (B.J.E., C.B.L.M.M.), Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8462-4037
C B L M MajoieDepartment of Radiology (B.J.E., C.B.L.M.M.), Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7600-9568
W H van ZwamDepartment of Radiology (W.H.v.Z.), Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1631-7056
D W J DippelNeurology (K.C.J.C., D.W.J.D.).ORCID 0000-0002-9234-3515
J J WentzelBiomedical Engineering (K.D., E.J.P., J.J.W., F.J.H.G.), Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9893-3404
A van der LugtFrom the Departments of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine (K.C.J.C., K.D., A.C.G.M.v.E., A.v.d.L.).ORCID 0000-0002-6159-2228
F J H GijsenBiomedical Engineering (K.D., E.J.P., J.J.W., F.J.H.G.), Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands f.gijsen@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-5246-9060
MR CLEAN investigators
Erasmus MC · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLAnna Needs Neuroblastoma Answers · USJ.P. Morgan · GBMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeCarotid webs are increasingly recognized as an important cause of (recurrent) ischemic stroke in patients without other cardiovascular risk factors. Hemodynamic flow patterns induced by these lesions might be associated with thrombus formation. The aim of our study was to evaluate flow patterns of carotid webs using computational fluid dynamics. MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients with a carotid web in the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) were selected for hemodynamic evaluation with computational fluid dynamics models based on lumen segmentations obtained from CT angiography scans. Hemodynamic parameters, including the area of recirculation zone, time-averaged wall shear stress, transverse wall shear stress, and the oscillatory shear index, were assessed and compared with the contralateral carotid bifurcation.

resultsIn our study, 9 patients were evaluated. Distal to the carotid webs, recirculation zones were significantly larger compared with the contralateral bifurcation (63 versus 43 mm

conclusionsCarotid webs are associated with increased recirculation zones and regional increased wall shear stress metrics that are associated with disturbed flow. These findings suggest that a carotid web might stimulate thrombus formation, which increases the risk of acute ischemic stroke.

Indexed as

Brain IschemiaCarotid ArteriesCerebrovascular CirculationComputed Tomography AngiographyFemaleHemodynamicsHumansHydrodynamicsMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsStress, MechanicalStrokeThrombosis

Identifiers

PMID30872422
PMCPMC7048501
OpenAlexW2922002068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.