Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34559418›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2021

Surgical and radiological interventions for treating symptomatic extracranial cervical artery dissection.

Niamh Hynes, Edel P Kavanagh, Sherif Sultan, Fionnuala Jordan

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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.

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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Advances in Management of the Stroke Etiology One-Percenters.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Niamh HynesDepartment of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, The Galway Clinic, Galway, Ireland.
Edel P KavanaghDepartment of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, The Galway Clinic, Galway, Ireland.
Sherif SultanDepartment of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, The Galway Clinic, Galway, Ireland.
Fionnuala JordanSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Galway Clinic · IEOllscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway · IEUniversity Hospital Galway · IE

Funding

Chief Scientist Office ETM/417
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCervical artery dissection (CeAD) is a pathological bleed or tear, or both, in the wall of the carotid or vertebral arteries as they course through the neck, and is a leading cause of stroke in young people.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of surgical and radiological interventions versus best medical treatment alone for treating symptomatic cervical artery dissection. SEARCH

methodsWe performed comprehensive searches of the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched March 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), 2020, Issue 4, in the Cochrane Library (searched March 2020), MEDLINE (1946 to March 2020) and Embase (1974 to March 2020). We searched relevant ongoing trials and research registers (searched March 2020), checked references in all relevant papers for additional eligible studies, and contacted authors and researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) of either surgical or endovascular intervention for the management of symptomatic CeAD were eligible for inclusion. Only studies with anticoagulants or antiplatelet treatment as the control group were included. Two review authors planned to independently extract data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcomes were ipsilateral stroke and disability. Secondary outcomes were death, any stroke, or transient ischaemic attack, residual stenosis (> 50%), recurrence of cervical dissection, expanding pseudoaneurysm, or major bleeding. We analysed the studies according to the first choice of treatment. We planned to assess for risk of bias and apply GRADE criteria for any included studies. MAIN

resultsWe did not find any completed RCTs or CCTs undertaken in this area of research. AUTHORS'

conclusionsNo RCTs or CCTs compared either surgery or endovascular therapy with control. Thus, there is no available evidence to support their use for the treatment of extracranial cervical artery dissection in addition to antithrombotic therapy in people who continue to have neurological symptoms when treated with antithrombotic therapy alone.

Indexed as

Aortic DissectionIschemic Attack, TransientStrokeAdolescentAnticoagulantsArteriesHumansAnticoagulants

Identifiers

PMID34559418
PMCPMC8078186
OpenAlexW2889862251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.