ArticleJAMA network open2022
Use of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization, Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting, and Carotid Endarterectomy in the US From 2015 to 2019.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transcarotid Artery Revascularization for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Translational stroke research · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative safety and efficacy of invasive therapies for carotid artery stenosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Utilization of the stop-short technique in transcarotid artery revascularization is associated with intraoperative common carotid artery dissection.Journal of vascular surgery · 2026Article
- Transcarotid Artery Revascularization Versus Carotid Artery Stenting for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis.Stroke · 2026Article
- Rethinking the impact of amaurosis with contemporary outcomes of carotid endarterectomy among patients with transient monocular blindness.Journal of vascular surgery · 2026Article
- Impact of the Medicare carotid stenting national coverage determination on procedure utilization and long-term stroke risk after carotid revascularization.Journal of vascular surgery · 2026Article
- Carotid Artery Stenting: Evolution, Evidence, and Contemporary Practice in the Era of Intensive Medical Therapy.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The contemporary role for carotid revascularization in older patients.Seminars in vascular surgery · 2026Review
- Comparative outcomes of transfemoral carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy versus transcarotid artery revascularization in standard- and high-risk patients since the CMS decision in October 2023 using the VQI.Journal of vascular surgery · 2026Article
- Three-year risk of stroke after transcarotid artery revascularization versus carotid endarterectomy among Medicare beneficiaries.Journal of vascular surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Predictors of postoperative stroke after transfemoral carotid artery stenting.Journal of vascular surgery · 2025Article
- Accuracy of posthospitalization stroke detection following carotid revascularization in Medicare claims.Journal of vascular surgery · 2025Article
- Racial Differences in Adoption and Outcomes of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization among High-Risk Adults with Carotid Artery Stenosis.Annals of vascular surgery · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Transcarotid vs Transfemoral Carotid Stenting for Stroke Prevention.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Outcomes of Symptomatic Extracranial Carotid Artery Stenting in Octogenarians: A Single-Center Retrospective Study on Restenosis, Risk Factors, and Complications.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Seven years of the transcarotid artery revascularization surveillance project, comparison to transfemoral stenting and endarterectomy.Journal of vascular surgery · 2024Article
- Higher stroke risk after carotid endarterectomy and transcarotid artery revascularization is associated with relative surgeon volume ratio.Journal of vascular surgery · 2024Article
- William M. Feinberg Lecture: Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis: Current and Future Considerations.Stroke · 2024Review
- Patient decision-making in the era of transcarotid artery revascularization.Journal of vascular surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: A transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) device was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2015 for carotid revascularization in patients at high risk for stroke, cranial nerve injury, or major cardiac event. It is unclear how the introduction of TCAR has changed the use of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS). Objective: To quantify the temporal changes in the operative approach to carotid revascularization (CEA vs TFCAS vs TCAR), and to identify patient and disease characteristics commonly associated with each approach. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study obtained data from the Vascular Quality Initiative database from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019. Patients with carotid artery stenosis who underwent CEA, TFCAS, or TCAR were included. Data were analyzed from January to April 2022. Exposures: Month and year of surgery as well as patient risk status. Main Outcomes and Measures: Number and proportion of carotid revascularization procedures by operative approach. Results: A total of 108 676 patients (mean [SD] age 56.6 [12.5] years; 66 684 men [61.4%]) were included in the analysis. The most common operative approach overall was CEA (n = 81 508 [75.0%]), followed by TFCAS (n = 15 578 [14.3%]) and TCAR (n = 11 590 [10.7%]). The number of procedures increased over the study period (16 754 in 2015 vs 27 269 in 2019; P < .001). In 2015, CEA was used in 84.9% of all cases, followed by TFCAS (14.4%) and TCAR (0.8%). In 2019, CEA was used in 64.8% of cases, followed by TCAR (21.9%) and TFCAS (13.3%). The proportional use of CEA decreased by 5.0% (95% CI, -7.4% to -2.6%) per year, and TCAR use increased by 5.3% (95% CI, 2.3%-8.3%) per year. Among patients at high risk, the change was greater: CEA use decreased by 7.8% (95% CI, -11.9% to -3.8%) per year, TFCAS decreased by 4.8% (95% CI, -9.5% to -0.14%) per year, and TCAR increased by 12.6% (95% CI, 7.1%-18.1%) per year. Multinomial logistic regression showed that patient risk status was the most important characteristic associated with TCAR compared with CEA (relative risk ratio, 36.10; 95% CI, 29.24-44.66; P < .001) and TFCAS (relative risk ratio, 14.10; 95% CI, 11.86-16.66; P < .001). Linear regression revealed no association between year of surgery and in-hospital myocardial infarction, stroke, or mortality. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study indicate that TCAR has become the dominant carotid revascularization approach, surpassing TFCAS and CEA in patients at high risk for stroke, cranial nerve injury, or cardiovascular events. Patient high-risk status was the main characteristic associated with a stenting approach, highlighting the perceived importance of carotid stenting therapies in this patient population.
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.