Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 353

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis

Open access
Chambers, Brian R, Donnan, Geoffrey·2005·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is of proven benefit in recently-symptomatic patients with severe carotid stenosis. Its role in asymptomatic stenosis is still debated. The Asymptomatic Carotid Surgery Trial (ACST) more than doubled the number of patients randomised to CEA trials. This revised review incorporates the recently published ACST results. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to determine the effects of CEA for patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (searched May 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2004), EMBASE (1980 to June 2004), Current Contents (1995 to January 1997), and reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted researchers in the field to identify additional published and unpublished studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: All completed randomised trials comparing CEA to medical treatment in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers extracted data and assessed trial quality. Attempts were made to contact investigators to obtain missing information. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials with a total of 5223 patients were included. In these trials, the overall net excess of operation-related perioperative stroke or death was 2.9%. For the primary outcome of perioperative stroke or death or any subsequent stroke, patients undergoing CEA fared better than those treated medically (relative risk (RR) 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.83). Similarly, for the outcome of perioperative stroke or death or subsequent ipsilateral stroke, there was benefit for the surgical group (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.90). For the outcome of any stroke or death, there was a non-significant trend towards fewer events in the surgical group (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.02). Subgroup analyses were performed for the outcome of perioperative stroke or death or subsequent carotid stroke. CEA appeared more beneficial in men than in women and more beneficial in younger patients than in older patients although the data for age effect were inconclusive. There was no statistically significant difference between the treatment effect estimates in patients with different grades of stenosis but the data were insufficient. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Despite about a 3% perioperative stroke or death rate, CEA for asymptomatic carotid stenosis reduces the risk of ipsilateral stroke, and any stroke, by approximately 30% over three years. However, the absolute risk reduction is small (approximately 1% per annum over the first few years of follow up in the two largest and most recent trials) but it could be higher with longer follow up.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd001923.pub2

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 353

Metadata

Authors
Chambers, B. R., & Donnan, G.
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-10-19
Volume
2008
Issue
4
Pages
CD001923-CD001923
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W1950146087
Cited by
353
References
2
FWCI
15.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd001923.pub2
The paper
Chambers, B. R., & Donnan, G. (2005). Carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd001923.pub2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.