ReviewFrontiers in neurology2022
Extra-Cranial Carotid Artery Stenosis: An Objective Analysis of the Available Evidence.
Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of carotid duplex in the assessment of carotid artery restenosis after endarterectomy or stenting.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Pooled it
- Retinal ischemia due to different stages of atherosclerosis - insights from a retrospective study on central retinal artery occlusion.Neurological research and practice · 2025Article
- Article
- Imaging of intracranial arterial disease: a comparison between MRI and unenhanced CT.Frontiers in radiology · 2024Article
- Quantifying Carotid Stenosis: History, Current Applications, Limitations, and Potential: How Imaging Is Changing the Scenario.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Carotid artery stenting for asymptomatic stenosis is associated with decreased 30-day readmission at very high volume centers.Journal of clinical neuroscience : official journal of the Neurosurgical Society of Australasia · 2023Article
- Words of Caution Regarding Safety Comparisons Between Transcarotid Artery Revascularization, Carotid Endarterectomy, and Carotid Stenting.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2022Article
- Controversies in the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis: from best medical therapy to a redefinition of surgical indications.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Carotid stenosis is arterial disease narrowing of the origin of the internal carotid artery (main brain artery). Knowing how to best manage this is imperative because it is common in older people and an important cause of stroke. Inappropriately high expectations have grown regarding the value of carotid artery procedures, such as surgery (endarterectomy) and stenting, for lowering the stroke risk associated with carotid stenosis. Meanwhile, the improving and predominant value of medical intervention (lifestyle coaching and medication) continues to be underappreciated. Methods and Results: This article aims to be an objective presentation and discussion of the scientific literature critical for decision making when the primary goal is to optimize patient outcome. This compilation follows from many years of author scrutiny to separate fact from fiction. Common sense conclusions are drawn from factual statements backed by original citations. Detailed research methodology is given in cited papers. This article has been written in plain language given the importance of the general public understanding this topic. Issues covered include key terminology and the economic impact of carotid stenosis. There is a summary of the evidence-base regarding the efficacy and safety of procedural and medical (non-invasive) interventions for both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. Conclusions are drawn with respect to current best management and research priorities. Several "furphies" (misconceptions) are exposed that are commonly used to make carotid stenting and endarterectomy outcomes appear similar. Ongoing randomized trials are mentioned and why they are unlikely to identify a routine practice indication for carotid artery procedures. There is a discussion of relevant worldwide guidelines regarding carotid artery procedures, including how they should be improved. There is an outline of systematic changes that are resulting in better application of the evidence-base. Conclusion: The cornerstone of stroke prevention is medical intervention given it is non-invasive and protects against all arterial disease complications in all at risk. The "big" question is, does a carotid artery procedure add patient benefit in the modern era and, if so, for whom?
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.