ArticleJournal of neuroendovascular therapy2025
Emergent Endovascular Intervention for Acute Neurological Deficits Post-Carotid Endarterectomy: A Single-Institutional Analysis and Systematic Review of the Literature.
Article in Journal of neuroendovascular therapy, 2025. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is a standard treatment for atherosclerotic carotid stenosis. Perioperative symptomatic restenosis or reocclusion of the carotid artery following CEA is a rare but serious complication that typically necessitates intervention. The efficacy and safety profile of emergent endovascular therapy (EVT) as an alternative to repeat CEA in the treatment of acute perioperative neurological decline remain unknown. Methods: All patients undergoing CEA in the Department of Neurosurgery at a single comprehensive stroke center from 2015 to 2024 were reviewed. Patients who underwent EVT for acute perioperative neurological deficits were included in our series. A systematic literature review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify articles relevant to the endovascular management of acute neurological deficits following CEA. Results: Four patients from our institutional cohort met the inclusion criteria. An additional 39 patients were identified from the literature review in 11 source articles, which yielded a total of 43 patients. CEA was performed for symptomatic lesions in 28 (28/32, 87.5%) patients. Abnormal angiographic findings were reported for all patients. Thrombus accumulation in or distal to the operated internal carotid artery (ICA) (26/43, 60.5%) and dissection flaps (15/43, 34.9%) were the most common findings. Five (11.6%) patients had tandem cervical ICA and intracranial occlusions, of which thrombectomy of the intracranial lesion was successfully performed on 3 patients. All patients except for 1 (42/43, 97.6%) underwent technically successful endovascular stenting. Following EVT, 76.7% (33/43) of patients had no persisting neurological deficits. Nine (20.9%) patients were found to have new cerebral infarcts on post-EVT imaging. In-hospital mortality was reported for 6 patients (14%), 4 of whom were found to have tandem cervical ICA and intracranial occlusions. Conclusion: EVT is likely a technically viable alternative treatment for patients with perioperative acute neurologic deficits after CEA. However, most of the literature available comes from case series, thereby limiting the quality of evidence. Improved reporting of standard stroke outcome measures may help to inform the implementation of EVT and repeat CEA for acute ischemic symptoms after 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.