ArticleStroke2026
Design Matters: How Methodological Decisions May Have Shaped the Findings of CREST-2.
Article in Stroke, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- CREST-2 findings are unchanged using an aggregated control group for the CAS and CEA trial.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2026Article
- Design Matters: Challenges and Remedies in CREST-2.Stroke · 2026Article
- Treatment of carotid stenosis: an updated review.Frontiers in stroke · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
CREST-2 (Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Trials) comprised 2 parallel randomized trials in asymptomatic carotid stenosis comparing medical management alone with medical management plus carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Carotid stenting achieved a modest but statistically significant 4-year reduction in primary events, whereas carotid endarterectomy did not. This commentary examines methodological features that may have favored the revascularization arms, including omission of peri-procedural myocardial infarction and major hemorrhage as end points; allowing operator-team members to perform neurological assessments; highly selective credentialing of carotid stenting operators; and a primary analysis that weighted early and late events equally. Taken together, these methodological features and ongoing advances in contemporary medical therapy suggest that carotid stenting, carotid endarterectomy, and medical management may yield similar outcomes in clinical practice.
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.