Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35227079›Full record

ReviewStroke2022

Lessons From ACST-2.

James F Meschia, Thomas G Brott

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Stroke, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

James F MeschiaVascular Neurology Division, Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL.ORCID 0000-0002-4475-8142
Thomas G BrottVascular Neurology Division, Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL.

Funding

CREST-2 Clinical Coordinating CenterU01NS080168 · NINDS · MAYO CLINIC JACKSONVILLE · PI Thomas G Brott, JAMES F MESCHIA · 2014 to 2026
$56.3M
Long-Term Observational Extension of Participants in the CREST-2 Randomized Clinical TrialU01NS119169 · NINDS · MAYO CLINIC JACKSONVILLE · PI HOWARD, GEORGE, LAL, BRAJESH K · 2021 to 2025
$3.8M
NINDS NIH HHS U01 NS080168NINDS NIH HHS U01 NS119169
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recent 130-center, international, second ACST trial (Asymptomatic Carotid Surgery Trial) involving 3625 patients found that regardless of whether a patient underwent stenting or endarterectomy, the periprocedural risk of disabling or fatal stroke was about 1% and the 5-year estimated risk of nonprocedural disabling or fatal stroke was 2.5%. With advances in technique, technology, and patient selection, stenting done by appropriately trained and experienced operators can achieve safety and efficacy comparable to endarterectomy for asymptomatic patients. The ongoing CREST-2 trial (Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Trial) will clarify whether revascularization, by either stenting or endarterectomy, remains an important therapeutic goal in the setting of modern intensive medical therapy.

Indexed as

Carotid StenosisEndarterectomy, CarotidStrokeHumansRisk FactorsStentsTime FactorsTreatment Outcomecarotid arterycarotid stenosisendarterectomyinfarctionstent

Identifiers

PMID35227079
PMCPMC8960366

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.