Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36600837›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

The Safety and Long-Term Efficacy of Carotid Artery Stenting: An All-Comers Registry.

Ratheesh Kumar, Davinder Chadha, Amitoj Chaddha, Rajeev Chauhan, Navreet Singh, Pathak Kamal, Atul Mishra, Navjyot Kaur

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ratheesh KumarCardiology, Army Hospital Research and Referral, New Delhi, IND.
Davinder ChadhaCardiology, Manipal Hospital, Bengaluru, IND.
Amitoj ChaddhaEmergency, St. John's Medical College, Bengaluru, IND.
Rajeev ChauhanCardiology, Command Hospital Air Force, Bengaluru, IND.
Navreet SinghCardiology, Army Institute of Cardio-Thoracic Sciences, Pune, IND.
Pathak KamalRadiology, Army Institute of Cardio-Thoracic Sciences, Pune, IND.
Atul MishraRadiology, Army Hospital Research and Referral, New Delhi, IND.
Navjyot KaurCardiology, Command Hospital Air Force, Bengaluru, IND.
Indian Army · INArmy Hospital Research and Referral · INSt.John's Medical College Hospital · INManipal Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged as a less invasive alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for the prevention of future cerebrovascular events in patients with carotid artery stenosis. Despite multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CAS and CEA for carotid disease, real-world data outside the rigorous environment of trials is scarce. Methods The present study is a prospective observational study conducted at a tertiary care center, wherein all patients who underwent CAS between January 2007 and December 2019 were included. All patients were followed up for one year of the last enrolled patient at an interval of one, six, and 12 months and then yearly thereafter. The primary composite outcome was defined as a combination of periprocedural (until 30 days of procedure) major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) and the long-term incidence of ipsilateral stroke. The secondary outcome included the rate of restenosis. Results A total of 115 patients (86 males and 29 females) (147 lesions) who underwent CAS between 2007 and 2019 were followed up for a median of 80.5 months. Seventy-seven (67.27%) patients were symptomatic, and 38/115 (33%) were asymptomatic. Periprocedural MACCEs were noted in six patients, and four patients had ipsilateral stroke on long-term follow-up; hence, the primary composite outcome was observed in 10 (8.7%) patients. Higher age was found to be significantly associated with the primary composite outcome (p-value = 0.005). Five (4.34%) patients were lost to follow-up, while four (3.48%) patients developed restenosis. Conclusion CAS is a safe and less invasive intervention in patients with significant carotid artery stenosis and is equally effective in preventing future strokes. The incidence of primary outcome rises with an increase in age.

Indexed as

carotid artery stentinglong termmajor adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (macces)real-world registrystroke

Identifiers

PMID36600837
PMCPMC9800945
OpenAlexW4310438577

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.