SynthesisMedicine2025
Cervical arteries tortuosity and its association with dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extra-Carotid Arterial Webs: A Single-Center Series and Systematic Review.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Spontaneous Multiple Cervical Artery Dissections Detected with High-Resolution MRI: A Prospective, Case-Series Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study investigated the link between arterial tortuosity and cervical artery dissection, focusing on carotid and vertebral tortuosity indices, as well as carotid tortuosity classifications (kinking, looping, and coiling).
methodsWe searched PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Google Scholar from database inception to January 2024. The inclusion criteria encompassed human studies on tortuosity and cervical, carotid, or vertebral artery dissection. Exclusion criteria included case reports, non-English studies, and studies solely on connective tissue disorders and diseases. Quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random-effects model was employed for mean differences and odds ratios. When meta-analysis was not feasible, we summarized and integrated the results narratively.
resultsSeven studies, involving 507 dissected patients and 582 non-dissected patients, were included. In a meta-analysis of 3 studies, vertebral tortuosity favored the dissection cases [MD = 3.58, 95% CI: 2.21-4.95]. The mean carotid tortuosity difference was not statistically significant in a meta-analysis of 2 studies [MD = 2.27, 95% CI: -0.16-4.70]. In the classification analysis, 2 studies indicated no conclusive association between kinking, coiling, and cervical arteries dissection. Regarding carotid classification and internal carotid artery dissection, meta-analyses only showed a significant association with kinking, but the result was inconclusive.
conclusionTortuosity index screenings may help prevent cervical artery dissection among at-risk individuals. However, the association with specific tortuosity classifications remains inconclusive, and further research is needed to validate these findings. Standardized measurement criteria are crucial for future studies.
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.