CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 401Cerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementPeripheral Artery Disease Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Restenosis after carotid artery stenting and endarterectomy: a secondary analysis of CREST, a randomised controlled trial

Open access
Lal, Brajesh K, Beach, Kirk W, Roubin, Gary S, Lutsep, Helmi L, Moore, Wesley S, Malas, Mahmoud B, Chiu, David, Gonzales, Nicole R, Burke, J Lee, Rinaldi, Michael, Elmore, James R, Weaver, Fred A, Narins, Craig R, Foster, Malcolm, Hodgson, Kim J, Shepard, Alexander D, Meschia, James F, Bergelin, Robert O, Voeks, Jenifer H, Howard, George, Brott, Thomas G·2012·The Lancet Neurology
DOI 10.1016/s1474-4422(12)70159-xPMC PMC3912998
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial (CREST), the composite primary endpoint of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death during the periprocedural period or ipsilateral stroke thereafter did not differ between carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis. A secondary aim of this randomised trial was to compare the composite endpoint of restenosis or occlusion. METHODS: Patients with stenosis of the carotid artery who were asymptomatic or had had a transient ischaemic attack, amaurosis fugax, or a minor stroke were eligible for CREST and were enrolled at 117 clinical centres in the USA and Canada between Dec 21, 2000, and July 18, 2008. In this secondary analysis, the main endpoint was a composite of restenosis or occlusion at 2 years. Restenosis and occlusion were assessed by duplex ultrasonography at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 48 months and were defined as a reduction in diameter of the target artery of at least 70%, diagnosed by a peak systolic velocity of at least 3·0 m/s. Studies were done in CREST-certified laboratories and interpreted at the Ultrasound Core Laboratory (University of Washington). The frequency of restenosis was calculated by Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and was compared during a 2-year follow-up period. We used proportional hazards models to assess the association between baseline characteristics and risk of restenosis. Analyses were per protocol. CREST is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00004732. FINDINGS: 2191 patients received their assigned treatment within 30 days of randomisation and had eligible ultrasonography (1086 who had carotid artery stenting, 1105 who had carotid endarterectomy). In 2 years, 58 patients who underwent carotid artery stenting (Kaplan-Meier rate 6·0%) and 62 who had carotid endarterectomy (6·3%) had restenosis or occlusion (hazard ratio [HR] 0·90, 95% CI 0·63-1·29; p=0·58). Female sex (1·79, 1·25-2·56), diabetes (2·31, 1·61-3·31), and dyslipidaemia (2·07, 1·01-4·26) were independent predictors of restenosis or occlusion after the two procedures. Smoking predicted an increased rate of restenosis after carotid endarterectomy (2·26, 1·34-3·77) but not after carotid artery stenting (0·77, 0·41-1·42). INTERPRETATION: Restenosis and occlusion were infrequent and rates were similar up to 2 years after carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting. Subsets of patients could benefit from early and frequent monitoring after revascularisation. FUNDING: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and Abbott Vascular Solutions.

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 · 10.1016/s1474-4422(12)70159-x

Cites

29 of 29 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Show all 29 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 400

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Lal, B. K., Beach, K. W., Roubin, G. S., Lutsep, H. L., Moore, W. S., Malas, M. B., Chiu, D., Gonzales, N. R., Burke, J. L., Rinaldi, M., Elmore, J. R., Weaver, F. A., Narins, C. R., Foster, M., Hodgson, K. J., Shepard, A. D., Meschia, J. F., Bergelin, R. O., Voeks, J. H., Howard, G., & Brott, T. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • NYU Langone Health (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Houston Methodist (US)
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
  • Intermountain Medical Center (US)
  • Geisinger Medical Center (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • University of Rochester Medicine (US)
  • Saint Thomas Midtown Hospital (US)
  • SIU Medicine (US)
  • Henry Ford Hospital (US)
  • Mayo Clinic in Florida (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Corresponding author
Brott, Thomas G
ORCID
Venue
The Lancet Neurology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-09
Volume
11
Issue
9
Pages
755-763
ISSN
1474-4422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s1474-4422(12)70159-x
PMC
PMC3912998
OpenAlex
W2107715463
Cited by
401
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 6
FWCI
25.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • The Lancet Neurology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke ((grant NS038384))
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Peripheral Artery Disease Management
Keywords
carotid artery stenting, carotid endarterectomy, carotid restenosis, carotid artery occlusion, carotid artery stenosis, CREST trial, duplex ultrasound, asymptomatic carotid stenosis, symptomatic carotid stenosis, restenosis risk factors, sex differences, carotid revascularization, peak systolic velocity
MeSH terms
Aged, Carotid Arteries, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, Stents, Tomography Scanners, X-Ray Computed, Carotid Stenosis, Endarterectomy, Carotid, Magnetic Resonance Angiography, Stroke, Kaplan-Meier Estimate

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