ArticleScience progress2026
Vascular clips for primary closure in classic carotid endarterectomy: A 5-year exploratory retrospective cohort study.
Article in Science progress, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveTo evaluate the intraoperative efficiency and long-term outcomes of clip-assisted primary closure versus conventional suturing in classic carotid endarterectomy (CEA).MethodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included 46 classic CEA procedures in 45 patients treated between 2013 and 2019. Procedures were divided into a clip group (n = 15) and a suture group (n = 31). The primary endpoints were carotid clamping time and intraoperative blood loss. Secondary endpoints included operative time, postoperative drainage volume, perioperative stroke, long-term stroke incidence, and all-cause mortality.ResultsThe clip group had a significantly shorter carotid clamping time than the suture group (12.67 ± 5.74 min vs. 18.26 ± 7.84 min, P = 0.048) and significantly lower intraoperative blood loss (38.00 ± 18.97 mL vs. 56.77 ± 23.01 mL, P = 0.010). No statistically significant between-group differences were observed in total operative time, postoperative drainage volume, perioperative stroke, long-term stroke incidence, or all-cause mortality.ConclusionsIn this exploratory retrospective cohort study, clip-assisted primary closure during classic CEA was associated with shorter carotid clamping time and lower intraoperative blood loss than conventional suturing. No signal of increased perioperative or long-term adverse outcomes was detected; however, the study was not powered to establish equivalence or non-inferiority for rare safety endpoints. These findings support the technical feasibility of clip-assisted primary closure in selected patients, but larger prospective studies are needed to further evaluate its safety and long-term effectiveness.
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.