ReviewClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2024
Is a Carotid Doppler Scan Useful for Managing Patients with Suspected Ocular Ischemic Syndrome?
Review in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2024. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This review aims to understand the value of a carotid Doppler scan (CDS) when managing patients with clinical/suspected ocular ischaemic syndrome (OIS); correlations between internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis reports; subsequent patterns of referral to vascular experts; and subsequent decisions concerning surgical versus medical management. Methods: A retrospective review of 402 CDS requests by a single eye center over 4 years (2016-2019) for patients with a clinical suspicion of OIS was conducted. Data analysis included 344 patients who had reported CDS of both ICAs. We also studied referral patterns by ophthalmologists to other specialties. Results: CDS requests were related to the retina (53.2%), neuro/TIA problems (31.1%), glaucoma (10.5%) and other issues (5.2%). The majority of patients (209/344, 60.8%) had normal CDA results. Of the 688 ICAs reported, 469 (68.2%) were normal, 219 (31.8%) had atheroma present, and only 83 (12.1%) had significant stenosis. Of 83 ICAs with stenosis, 23 (27.7%) had ≥70% stenosis, 24 (28.9%) had 50-69% stenosis, and 25 (30.1%) had <50% stenosis. A total of 60/344 (17.4%) patients were referred to vascular/stroke teams: 15/60 (25%) referred had bilateral disease, and only 2/60 (3.3%) were offered carotid endarterectomy. All referred patients commenced statins and low-dose aspirin. Conclusion: Our cohort showed a low incidence of ICA stenosis according to CDS reports in patients with suspected OIS. There were very low rates of vascular and endarterectomy referral. Commencement of conservative treatment (mini aspirin+statin) by ophthalmologists could be beneficial even in the early stage of presenting clinical evidence of OIS.
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.