ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2024
Outcomes of carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians compared to their younger counterparts: a retrospective observational study.
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 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 study was performed to analyze the association between age and outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) by comparing postoperative outcomes between octogenarians and younger patients. Methods: From November 1994 to December 2022, 1,585 internal carotid arteries of 1,434 patients were enrolled. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: octogenarians (≥80 years old) and non-octogenarians (<80 years old). Primary endpoints were early (≤30 days) outcomes of ipsilateral stroke, any stroke, myocardial infarction, death, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We also compared overall any stroke and death between the 2 groups. Results: One of 132 octogenarians (0.8%) and 17 of 1,453 non-octogenarians (1.1%) experienced ipsilateral stroke within 30 days. Thirty-day MACE occurred in 4 of 132 octogenarians (3%) and 44 of 1,453 non-octogenarians (3%). There were no significant differences in any early (≤30 days) outcomes. Symptomatic status was associated with increased 30-day MACE (odds ratio [OR], 2.610; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.450-4.696; P = 0.003) and 30-day any stroke (OR, 3.999; 95% CI, 1.627-9.828; P = 0.003). Symptomatic status was also associated with overall any stroke (hazard ratio [HR], 2.885; 95% CI, 1.865-4.463; P < 0.001), but age of ≥80 years was not associated with 30-day MACE, 30-day any stroke, or overall stroke. Age of ≥80 years was only associated with overall survival (HR, 2.644; 95% CI, 1.967-3.555; P < 0.001). Conclusion: CEA would be a safe and effective treatment for octogenarians with low 30-day complications and long-term stroke rates, comparable with that of younger counterparts. Advanced age is not a contraindication for CEA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.