Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34430642›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2021

Intraoperative completion studies in carotid endarterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of techniques and outcomes.

Christoph Knappich, Thomas Lang, Pavlos Tsantilas, Sofie Schmid, Michael Kallmayer, Bernhard Haller, Hans-Henning Eckstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Christoph KnappichDepartment for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Thomas LangDepartment for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Pavlos TsantilasDepartment for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Sofie SchmidDepartment for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Michael KallmayerDepartment for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Bernhard HallerInstitute of Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Hans-Henning EcksteinDepartment for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeclining perioperative stroke and death rates over the past 3 decades have been paralleled by an increasing use of intraoperative completion studies (ICS) following carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Techniques applied include angiography, intraoperative duplex ultrasound (IDUS), flowmetry, and angioscopy. This systematic review and meta-analysis is aiming on providing an overview of techniques and corresponding outcomes.

methodsA PubMed based systematic literature review comprising the years 1980 through 2020 was performed using predefined keywords to identify articles on different ICS techniques. Pooled analyses and meta-analyses estimating risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were performed to compare outcomes of different ICS modes to nonapplication of any ICS. I

resultsIdentification of 34 studies including patients undergoing CEA with angiography (n=53,218), IDUS (n=20,030), flowmetry (n=16,812), and angioscopy (n=2,291). Corresponding rates of perioperative stroke were 1.5%, 1.8%, 3.6%, and 1.5%, perioperative stroke or death occurred in 1.7%, 1.9%, 2.2%, and 2.0%. Intraoperative surgical revision rates were 6.2%, 5.9%, and 7.9% after CEA with angiography, IDUS, and angioscopy, respectively. Compared to nonapplication of any ICS, the pooled analysis revealed angiography to be significantly associated with lower rates of stroke (RR 0.47; 95% CI, 0.36-0.62; P<0.0001) and stroke or death (RR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.70-0.83; P<0.0001). IDUS was significantly associated with lower rates of stroke (RR 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43-0.73; P<0.0001) and stroke or death (RR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.93; P=0.0018), whereas angioscopy showed a significant association with a lower stroke rate (RR 0.48; 95% CI, 0.033-0.68; P=0.0001), but no effect on the combined stroke or death rate. Angioscopy was associated with a higher intraoperative revision rate compared to angiography (RR 1.29; 95% CI, 1.07-1.54; P=0.006). The meta-analyses confirmed lower perioperative stroke or death rates for angiography (RR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76-0.91) and IDUS (RR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.98) compared to non-application of any ICS, whereas flowmetry showed no significant association.

conclusionsThis study represents the first systematic literature review and meta-analysis on usage of ICSs in CEA. Data strongly indicate a significant beneficial effect of angiography, IDUS, and angioscopy on perioperative CEA outcomes. Any carotid surgeon should consider implementation of ICSs in his routine armamentarium.

Indexed as

Angiographyangioscopycarotid endarterectomy (CEA)flowmetryquality controlultrasound

Identifiers

PMID34430642
PMCPMC8350645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.