ReviewInternal and emergency medicine2020
Antithrombotic treatment of asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis: a medical dilemma.
Review in Internal and emergency medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of aspirin in patients with established asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Without Symptomatic Atherosclerotic Disease.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a carotid atherosclerosis risk prediction model based on a Chinese population.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Deficiency of natural anticoagulants: how should we manage cardiovascular prevention?Internal and emergency medicine · 2021Article
- Correlation Analysis of Huayu Tongmai Decoction Intervention and Prognosis Indexes of Patients with Carotid Atherosclerosis.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Carotid artery atherosclerosis (CAAS) is a common finding in asymptomatic subjects evaluated for cardiovascular (CV)-risk stratification. Besides the careful control of CV-risk factors, antithrombotic agents, and in particular aspirin, may be considered for primary prevention in patients at CV-risk. However, there is strong controversy on the use of aspirin in primary prevention. Even if several studies confirmed the association between CAAS and CV-events, CAAS is not universally recognized as an independent risk factor and the choice to use aspirin as primary prevention in these patients remains a medical dilemma. Here we review the available evidence on the prognostic value of asymptomatic CAAS for major CV-events and on the utility of antithrombotic agents in this population. We conclude that the detection of asymptomatic CAAS can not be considered as a direct indication to carry out primary prophylaxis with antithrombotic drugs, and the choice to use aspirin should be made only after the careful estimate of the individual's CV-and hemorrhagic risk.
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.