ArticleCureus2020
Endovascular Treatment of Acute Carotid Stent Occlusion: Aspiration Thrombectomy and Angioplasty.
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of Occlusion after Carotid Stenting.Annals of vascular surgery · 2024Article
- Acute carotid stent thrombosis: A case report and literature review.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Article
- A Patient with Repeated Carotid Stent Thrombosis.The journal of Tehran Heart Center · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Acute carotid stent occlusion (CSO) is a rare complication of endovascular carotid stent placement that requires emergent intervention. We describe angioplasty or combined angioplasty and aspiration thrombectomy as a new endovascular technique for CSO treatment. The technique is compared to others previously described in the literature. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent endovascular treatment (ET) of acute symptomatic CSO from January 2008 to March 2018 at our neurovascular referral center. Patient demographics, endovascular treatment details, and outcome data were determined from the electronic medical record. Primary outcome was successful stent recanalization and cerebral reperfusion (modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (mTICI) score IIB-III). Secondary outcomes were National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) shift from presentation to discharge, mortality, and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 3 months. Additionally, a literature review (years 2008-2019) was performed to characterize other techniques for ET of CSO. Results Four patients who underwent ET of acute CSO were identified. ET treatment by angioplasty (n = 1) or combined aspiration thrombectomy and angioplasty (n = 3) resulted in carotid stent recanalization in all patients. Tandem intracranial occlusions were present in three patients (75%), and successful cerebral reperfusion was achieved in all patients. Patient symptoms improved (mean NIHSS shift -5.3 ± 7.2 at discharge). One patient died of a symptomatic reperfusion hemorrhage and another died of cardiac complications by 3-month follow-up. The mRS scores of the surviving patients were 1 and 3. Previously described studies (n = 14) using different and varied techniques had moderate recanalization rates and outcomes. Conclusion Combined aspiration thrombectomy and angioplasty for the neurointerventional treatment of acute CSO leads to high rates of stent recanalization and cerebral reperfusion. The recanalization rate here is improved compared to previously reported techniques. Further multicenter studies are required to risk-stratify patients for specific ET interventions.
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.