ArticleNMC case report journal2022
Odontogenic Pericarotid Abscess after Carotid Endarterectomy.
Article in NMC case report journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) for internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis have specific risks. Therefore, the accurate evaluation and management of each risk factor are important, especially for patients who are at high risk for both CEA and CAS. We report the case of a 77-year-old man with right ICA stenosis that progressed despite optimal medical treatment. In addition, he had several risk factors for both CEA and CAS, including previous cervical radiation therapy, contralateral ICA occlusion, chronic kidney insufficiency, and severe aortic valve stenosis. CEA was performed with priority given to aortic valve stenosis without complications, and the patient was discharged 10 days postoperatively, without neurological sequelae. However, a pericarotid cervical abscess was detected by carotid echo, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) 1 month after CEA that required surgical drainage. The infection was thought to be odontogenic because the pathogen was identified as normal oral bacterial flora, and a wound infection was not apparent. Teeth extraction and abscess drainage, in combination with antibiotic therapy, successfully cured the infection without additional complications. Odontogenic cervical abscesses after CEA can occur, especially if the patient is at risk of infection. Therefore, both preoperative and postoperative dental evaluation and management are recommended. As in this case, a cervical abscess can occur without wound infection, and the abscess diagnosis is sometimes difficult from wound inspection alone. Cervical echocardiogram and CT were useful for detecting fluid collection, whereas MRI was useful for qualitatively evaluating the lesion.
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.