ArticleNeurosurgical review2026
Mid- to long-term outcomes of different treatment strategies for chronic carotid artery occlusion: a single-center cohort study.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2026. 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
Chronic internal carotid artery occlusion (CICAO) is a significant cause of ischemic cerebrovascular events, with an annual stroke risk of up to 20%. Although the long-term efficacy of hybrid surgical revascularization (HSR) versus conservative medical therapy (CMT) remains controversial, preliminary studies suggest HSR may improve cognitive function. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of HSR versus CMT in CICAO patients and explore prognostic factors. A retrospective analysis included 62 CICAO patients (37 HSR, 25 CMT) from Beijing Tiantan Hospital (2016-2019), with a mean follow-up of 81 months. The HSR group underwent carotid endarterectomy combined with endovascular therapy, while the CMT group received standardized antiplatelet and lipid-lowering therapy. The primary endpoint was recurrent cerebral infarction, and the secondary endpoint was mortality. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and multivariable Cox regression models were used for exploratory efficacy assessment. Given the limited sample size and the non-randomized treatment allocation, propensity score matching was not performed; instead, treatment allocation and baseline imbalance were explicitly described and the findings were interpreted with caution. The HSR group showed a lower annual recurrent infarction rate than the CMT group (3.6% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.025), whereas the apparent mortality difference was not supported by adjusted analysis because no death events occurred in the HSR group and the mortality model was unstable. Subgroup analysis showed heterogeneity according to angiographic recanalization status. In survival analysis, HSR was associated with a numerically lower risk of recurrent infarction, but the association did not reach statistical significance after adjustment (adjusted HR 0.49, p = 0.16). In this single-center retrospective cohort, HSR was associated with a lower crude rate of recurrent cerebral infarction during long-term follow-up, but the adjusted analyses did not confirm a statistically robust reduction in recurrent infarction or mortality. These findings should therefore be interpreted as hypothesis-generating. Hemodynamic improvement rather than complete anatomical recanalization may be relevant to outcome, and larger prospective studies are required for confirmation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42171792What 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.