Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28959466›Full record

ReviewStroke and vascular neurology2016

Appropriate management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

J David Spence, Hongsong Song, Guanliang Cheng

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Stroke and vascular neurology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Adaptive Wall Shear Stress Imaging in Phantoms, Simulations and In Vivo.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2023
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Pulse Wave Imaging Coupled With Vector Flow Mapping: A Phantom, Simulation, and In Vivo Study.IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Flow-metabolism uncoupling in patients with asymptomatic unilateral carotid artery stenosis assessed by multi-modal magnetic resonance imaging.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Poster Viewing Sessions PA00-A01 to PA00-A49.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

3 authors.

J David SpenceRobarts Research Institute, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Hongsong SongPeking University Third Hospital, Beijing, The People's Republic of China.
Guanliang ChengHuai'an First People's Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Huai'an, The People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With modern intensive medical therapy, the annual risk of ipsilateral stroke in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) is now down to ∼0.5%. Despite this, there is a widespread practice of routine intervention in ACS with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and stenting (CAS). This is being justified on the basis of much higher risks with medical therapy in trials conducted decades ago, compared with lower risks of intervention in recent trials with no medical arm. Such extrapolations are invalid. Although recent trials have shown that after subtracting periprocedural risks the outcomes with CEA and CAS are now comparable to medical therapy, the periprocedural risks still far outweigh the risks with medical therapy. In the asymptomatic carotid trial (ACT) 1 trial, the 30-day risk of stroke or death was 2.9% with CAS and 1.7% with CEA. In the CREST trial, the 30-day risk of stroke or death among asymptomatic patients was 2.5% for stenting and 1.4% for endarterectomy. Thus, intensive medical therapy is much safer than either CAS or CEA. The only patients with ACS who should receive intervention are those who can be identified as being at high risk. The best validated method is transcranial Doppler embolus detection. Other approaches in development for identifying vulnerable plaques include intraplaque haemorrhage on MRI, ulceration and plaque lucency on ultrasound, and plaque inflammation on positron emission tomography/CT. Intensive medical therapy for ACS includes smoking cessation, a Mediterranean diet, effective blood pressure control, antiplatelet therapy, intensive lipid-lowering therapy and treatment with B vitamins (with methylcobalamin instead of cyanocobalamin), particularly in patients with metabolic B

Indexed as

Endarterectomy, CarotidEndovascular ProceduresAsymptomatic DiseasesCardiovascular AgentsCarotid StenosisClinical Decision-MakingHumansRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsStentsTreatment OutcomeCardiovascular Agentscarotid stenosisEndarterectomyMedical therapyStentingTranscranial Doppler

Identifiers

PMID28959466
PMCPMC5435189

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.