ArticleArchives of medical science : AMS2021
Long-term survival of carotid stenting patients with regard to single- or double-vessel carotid artery disease: a propensity score matching analysis.
Article in Archives of medical science : AMS, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is lack of long-term data outside of controlled clinical trials in carotid artery stenting (CAS). In this study, we compared the short-term outcome, long-term survival, and rate of re-interventions for restenosis in patients after CAS, related to the extent of carotid atherosclerosis classified as single-vessel (unilateral) or double-vessel (bilateral) carotid artery disease. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 599 patients with significant carotid artery stenosis, who underwent 763 CAS procedures, and used the propensity score to match 226 pairs (452 patients) in the single- or double-vessel carotid disease.
resultsThere was no significant difference in the occurrence of in-hospital major adverse events (3.5% vs. 3.1% of patients in the double-vessel carotid group vs. the single-vessel carotid group;
conclusionsPatients with CAS and significant double-vessel carotid artery disease had similar peri-procedural risk, but had a worse long-term survival, and a higher rate of re-interventions for restenosis compared to the single-vessel carotid artery disease patients.
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.