Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31431840›Full record

ArticleCureus2019

Utility of Intravascular Ultrasound During Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting with Proximal Protection.

Simon Morr, Kunal Vakharia, Andrew A Fanous, Muhammad Waqas, Adnan H Siddiqui

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04234854 (OPTIMAl Endovascular Exclusion of High-risk Carotid Plaque Using the CGuard™ Stent in Patients With Symptoms or Signs of Carotid Stenosis-related Brain Injury), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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.

NCT04234854 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

OPTIMAl Endovascular Exclusion of High-risk Carotid Plaque Using the CGuard™ Stent in Patients With Symptoms or Signs of Carotid Stenosis-related Brain Injury: IVUS Controlled Investigator Initiated Multcentric Multi-specialty Study

TypeobservationalSponsorJohn Paul II Hospital, KrakowRan2020 to 2023Enrolled200ConditionsCarotid Artery DiseasesArmsIntravascular Utrasound (IVUS) of Carotid Artery after implantation of CGuard stent
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Simon MorrNeurosurgery, New York-Presbyterian Hospital-Columbia and Cornell, New York, USA.
Kunal VakhariaNeurosurgery, Gates Vascular Institute/Kaleida Health, Buffalo, USA.
Andrew A FanousNeurosciences, INOVA Medical Group Neurosurgery, Alexandria, USA.
Muhammad WaqasNeurosurgery, Gates Vascular Institute/Kaleida Health, Buffalo, USA.
Adnan H SiddiquiNeurosurgery, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, USA.
Kaleida Health · USPresbyterian Hospital · USJacobs Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an established treatment for patients at high-risk for endarterectomy. Patients who undergo CAS have been shown to have periprocedural microembolic events on transcranial Doppler ultrasonography. Flow reversal is often applied in these situations to prevent distal emboli and concurrently allow blood to flush into the common carotid artery. Patients who demonstrate soft plaque morphology that may embolize distally during CAS benefit from flow reversal. Even so, the all-stroke risk in these patients is nearly 1.4%. High-risk patients typically have more difficult plaque morphology; flow reversal decreases the rate of distal emboli but does not offer the intraprocedural visualization seen with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). In this paper, we illustrate potential periprocedural outcomes associated with stenting of the stenotic carotid bifurcation under flow reversal and how IVUS influenced endovascular management. Three high-risk patients who underwent CAS with direct common carotid artery cutdown approaches due to common carotid ostia disease with flow-reversal proximal embolic protection also had intraprocedural IVUS performed to evaluate plaque morphology and stability before the protection system was removed. Case 1 illustrates no intraluminal thrombus on IVUS, requiring no further intervention after stent placement. Case 2 demonstrates intraluminal thrombus on IVUS requiring a second stent to stabilize plaque. Case 3 shows the inadequate resolution of thrombus after a second stent, which was addressed with balloon angioplasty. In our experience, using IVUS as an adjunct to CAS under proximal embolic protection helped demonstrate plaque morphology and plaque fragmentation after stent placement. These cases illustrate the potential benefit of allowing stabilization of the plaque before flow reversal is stopped.

Indexed as

carotid artery stentingflow reversalintravascular ultrasoundproximal embolic protectionthrombus

Identifiers

PMID31431840
PMCPMC6695231
OpenAlexW2949563133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.