Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36570420›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2023

Carotid endarterectomy versus carotid stenting for asymptomatic carotid stenosis: Evaluating the overlapping meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.

Ahmed Y Azzam, Sherief Ghozy, Adam Elswedy, Mohammed A Azab, Kevin M Kallmes, Adam A Dmytriw, Ramanathan Kadirvel, David F Kallmes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of radiology open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Platelet-Rich Plasma for Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Cross-Sectional Appraisal of Overlapping Meta-Analyses.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 7 institutions in 3 countries.

Ahmed Y AzzamNested Knowledge, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Sherief GhozyDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Adam ElswedyBiomedicinskt Centrum BMC, Uppsala University, Husargatan 3, 752 37 Uppsala, Sweden.
Mohammed A AzabDepartment of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neurosciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA.
Kevin M KallmesNested Knowledge, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Adam A DmytriwNeuroendovascular Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Ramanathan KadirvelDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
David F KallmesDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Harvard University · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USMinnesota Medical Association · USUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Utah · USUppsala University · SEWinnMed · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Asymptomatic carotid stenosis is associated with increased risk of ischemic stroke. The management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis ranges from open surgical approaches, minimally invasive endovascular interventions, and medical therapeutics. However, the research synthesis comparing these interventions, as shown by the scattered and overlapping published meta-analysis, has been inconsistent and non-comprehensive. Methods: Using previously-employed methods, we searched for and compared published meta-analyses comparing carotid endarterectomy and carotid stenting. A comprehensive search was conducted for all relevant studies published until November 13th, 2021, using the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, OVID, and Google Scholar. Results: Five meta-analysis studies were included in this review. In summary, clinical findings were: carotid endarterectomy reduced the rate of ischemic stroke and stroke-related mortality, but led to a higher rate of intraoperative cranial nerve injury. There was no significant difference between carotid endarterectomy and carotid stenting in ipsilateral stroke and myocardial infarction events. Conclusions: The clinical findings favor the carotid endarterectomy over the carotid stenting in terms of stroke incidence (overall and minor events) and stroke-related mortality rates. However, the carotid stenting was superior to the carotid endarterectomy in the events of cranial nerve injury during the intervention.

Indexed as

Carotid endarterectomyCarotid stenosisCarotid stentingIschemic strokeMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID36570420
PMCPMC9768224
OpenAlexW4312211085

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.