The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Long-term outcomes after stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis: the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) randomised trial
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Stenting is an alternative to endarterectomy for treatment of carotid artery stenosis, but long-term efficacy is uncertain. We report long-term data from the randomised International Carotid Stenting Study comparison of these treatments. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis were randomly assigned 1:1 to open treatment with stenting or endarterectomy at 50 centres worldwide. Randomisation was computer generated centrally and allocated by telephone call or fax. Major outcomes were assessed by an independent endpoint committee unaware of treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was fatal or disabling stroke in any territory after randomisation to the end of follow-up. Analysis was by intention to treat ([ITT] all patients) and per protocol from 31 days after treatment (all patients in whom assigned treatment was completed). Functional ability was rated with the modified Rankin scale. This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470. FINDINGS: 1713 patients were assigned to stenting (n=855) or endarterectomy (n=858) and followed up for a median of 4·2 years (IQR 3·0-5·2, maximum 10·0). Three patients withdrew immediately and, therefore, the ITT population comprised 1710 patients. The number of fatal or disabling strokes (52 vs 49) and cumulative 5-year risk did not differ significantly between the stenting and endarterectomy groups (6·4% vs 6·5%; hazard ratio [HR] 1·06, 95% CI 0·72-1·57, p=0·77). Any stroke was more frequent in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group (119 vs 72 events; ITT population, 5-year cumulative risk 15·2% vs 9·4%, HR 1·71, 95% CI 1·28-2·30, p<0·001; per-protocol population, 5-year cumulative risk 8·9% vs 5·8%, 1·53, 1·02-2·31, p=0·04), but were mainly non-disabling strokes. The distribution of modified Rankin scale scores at 1 year, 5 years, or final follow-up did not differ significantly between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: Long-term functional outcome and risk of fatal or disabling stroke are similar for stenting and endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. FUNDING: Medical Research Council, Stroke Association, Sanofi-Synthélabo, European Union.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cites
Beneficial Effect of Carotid Endarterectomy in Symptomatic Patients with High-Grade Carotid Stenosis
(1991) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199108153250701 · Cited by 8,368
Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients
van Swieten, J. C., Koudstaal, P. J., Visser, M. C., Schouten, H. J., & van Gijn, J. (1988) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.19.5.604 · Cited by 6,512
Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies
Higgins, J. P., & Altman, D. G. (2008) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9780470712184.ch8 · Cited by 3,396
Cited by
Aboyans, V., Ricco, J.-B., Bartelink, M.-L. E. L., Björck, M., Brodmann, M., Cohnert, T., Collet, J.-P., Czerny, M., De Carlo, M., Debus, S., et al. (2018) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehx095 · Cited by 3,293
2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of peripheral arterial and aortic diseases
Mazzolai, L., Teixido-Tura, G., Lanzi, S., Boc, V., Bossone, E., Brodmann, M., Bura-Rivière, A., De Backer, J., Deglise, S., Della Corte, A., et al. (2024) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehae179 · Cited by 993
Self-citationAboyans, V., Ricco, J.-B., Bartelink, M.-L. E. L., Björck, M., Brodmann, M., Cohnert, T., Collet, J.-P., Czerny, M., De Carlo, M., Debus, S., et al. (2018) · European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.07.018 · Cited by 963
Self-citationAntithrombotic Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation
Lip, G. Y. H., Banerjee, A., Boriani, G., Chiang, C. E., Fargo, R., Freedman, B., Lane, D. A., Ruff, C. T., Turakhia, M., Werring, D., et al. (2018) · Chest · doi:10.1016/j.chest.2018.07.040 · Cited by 939
Schermerhorn, M. L., Liang, P., Eldrup-Jorgensen, J., Cronenwett, J. L., Nolan, B. W., Kashyap, V. S., Wang, G. J., Motaganahalli, R. L., & Malas, M. B. (2019) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2019.18441 · Cited by 269
Metadata
- Authors
- Bonati, L. H., Dobson, J., Featherstone, R. L., Ederle, J., van der Worp, H. B., de Borst, G. J., Mali, W. P. T. M., Beard, J. D., Cleveland, T., Engelter, S. T., Lyrer, P. A., Ford, G. A., Dorman, P. J., & Brown, M. M.
- Venue
- The Lancet
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-02
- Volume
- 385
- Issue
- 9967
- Pages
- 529-538
- ISSN
- 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
- 0140-6736
- OpenAlex
- W2109652445
- Cited by
- 550
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 33.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Long-term outcomes after stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis: the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) randomised trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61184-3
- The paper
- Bonati, L. H., Dobson, J., Featherstone, R. L., Ederle, J., van der Worp, H. B., de Borst, G. J., Mali, W. P. T. M., Beard, J. D., Cleveland, T., Engelter, S. T., Lyrer, P. A., Ford, G. A., Dorman, P. J., & Brown, M. M. (2015). Long-term outcomes after stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis: the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) randomised trial. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61184-3
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.