The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Antiplatelet treatment compared with anticoagulation treatment for cervical artery dissection (CADISS): a randomised trial
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Extracranial carotid and vertebral artery dissection is an important cause of stroke, especially in young people. In some observational studies it has been associated with a high risk of recurrent stroke. Both antiplatelet drugs and anticoagulant drugs are used to reduce risk of stroke but whether one treatment strategy is more effective than the other is unknown. We compared their efficacy in the Cervical Artery Dissection in Stroke Study (CADISS), with the additional aim of establishing the true risk of recurrent stroke. METHODS: We did this randomised trial at hospitals with specialised stroke or neurology services (39 in the UK and seven in Australia). We included patients with extracranial carotid and vertebral dissection with onset of symptoms within the past 7 days. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an automated telephone randomisation service to receive antiplatelet drugs or anticoagulant drugs (specific treatment decided by the local clinician) for 3 months. Patients and clinicians were not masked to allocation, but investigators assessing endpoints were. The primary endpoint was ipsilateral stroke or death in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered with EUDract (2006-002827-18) and ISRN (CTN44555237). FINDINGS: We enrolled 250 participants (118 carotid, 132 vertebral). Mean time to randomisation was 3·65 days (SD 1·91). The major presenting symptoms were stroke or transient ischaemic attack (n=224) and local symptoms (headache, neck pain, or Horner's syndrome; n=26). 126 participants were assigned to antiplatelet treatment versus 124 to anticoagulant treatment. Overall, four (2%) of 250 patients had stroke recurrence (all ipsilateral). Stroke or death occurred in three (2%) of 126 patients versus one (1%) of 124 (odds ratio [OR] 0·335, 95% CI 0·006-4·233; p=0·63). There were no deaths, but one major bleeding (subarachnoid haemorrhage) in the anticoagulant group. Central review of imaging failed to confirm dissection in 52 patients. Preplanned per-protocol analysis excluding these patients showed stroke or death in three (3%) of 101 patients in the antiplatelet group versus one (1%) of 96 patients in the anticoagulant group (OR 0·346, 95% CI 0·006-4·390; p=0·66). INTERPRETATION: We found no difference in efficacy of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs at preventing stroke and death in patients with symptomatic carotid and vertebral artery dissection but stroke was rare in both groups, and much rarer than reported in some observational studies. Diagnosis of dissection was not confirmed after review in many cases, suggesting that radiographic criteria are not always correctly applied in routine clinical practice. FUNDING: Stroke Association.
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
SCHULMAN, S., & KEARON, C. (2005) · Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis · doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2005.01204.x · Cited by 5,009
SCHULMAN, S., ANGERÅS, U., BERGQVIST, D., ERIKSSON, B., LASSEN, M. R., & FISHER, W. (2010) · Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis · doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2009.03678.x · Cited by 3,756
Cerebrovascular disease in the community: results of a WHO collaborative study.
Aho, K., Harmsen, P., Hatano, S., Marquardsen, J., Smirnov, V. E., & Strasser, T. (1980) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 1,310
Cervical-artery dissections: predisposing factors, diagnosis, and outcome
Debette, S., & Leys, D. (2009) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(09)70084-5 · Cited by 833
Time Course of Symptoms in Extracranial Carotid Artery Dissections: A Series of 80 Patients
Biousse, V., D’Anglejan-Chatillon, J., Touboul, P.-J., Amarenco, P., & Bousser, M.-G. (1995) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.26.2.235 · Cited by 377
Stroke Patterns of Internal Carotid Artery Dissection in 40 Patients
Lucas, C., Moulin, T., Deplanque, D., Tatu, L., & Chavot, D. (1998) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.29.12.2646 · Cited by 315
Risk of stroke and recurrent dissection after a cervical artery dissection: A multicenter study
Touzé, E., Gauvrit, J.-Y., Moulin, T., Meder, J.-F., Bracard, S., & Mas, J.-L. (2003) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000094325.95097.86 · Cited by 304
Cervical Arterial Dissection: Time for a Therapeutic Trial?
Beletsky, V., Nadareishvili, Z., Lynch, J., Shuaib, A., Woolfenden, A., & Norris, J. W. (2003) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.0000098649.39767.bc · Cited by 257
Aspirin vs anticoagulation in carotid artery dissection: A study of 298 patients
Georgiadis, D., Arnold, M., von Buedingen, H. C., Valko, P., Sarikaya, H., Rousson, V., Mattle, H. P., Bousser, M. G., & Baumgartner, R. W. (2009) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181a2a50a · Cited by 170
Cerebral microembolism in acute spontaneous internal carotid artery dissection
Molina, C. A., Alvarez-Sabín, J., Schonewille, W. J., Montaner, J., Rovira, À., Abilleira, S., & Codina, A. (2000) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.55.11.1738 · Cited by 96
Cited by
Kleindorfer, D. O., Towfighi, A., Chaturvedi, S., Cockroft, K. M., Gutierrez, J., Lombardi-Hill, D., Kamel, H., Kernan, W. N., Kittner, S. J., Leira, E. C., et al. (2021) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/str.0000000000000375 · Cited by 3,237
Epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of intracranial artery dissection
Debette, S., Compter, A., Labeyrie, M.-A., Uyttenboogaart, M., Metso, T. M., Majersik, J. J., Goeggel-Simonetti, B., Engelter, S. T., Pezzini, A., Bijlenga, P., et al. (2015) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(15)00009-5 · Cited by 466
First International Consensus on the diagnosis and management of fibromuscular dysplasia
Gornik, H. L., Persu, A., Adlam, D., Aparicio, L. S., Azizi, M., Boulanger, M., Bruno, R. M., de Leeuw, P., Fendrikova-Mahlay, N., Froehlich, J., et al. (2019) · Vascular Medicine · doi:10.1177/1358863x18821816 · Cited by 432
First international consensus on the diagnosis and management of fibromuscular dysplasia
Gornik, H. L., Persu, A., Adlam, D., Aparicio, L. S., Azizi, M., Boulanger, M., Bruno, R. M., De Leeuw, P., Fendrikova-Mahlay, N., Froehlich, J., et al. (2019) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002019 · Cited by 113
Metadata
- Venue
- The Lancet Neurology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-04
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 361-367
- ISSN
- 1474-4422 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2147828535
- Cited by
- 503
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 44.72
- 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: Antiplatelet treatment compared with anticoagulation treatment for cervical artery dissection (CADISS): a randomised trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1474-4422(15)70018-9
- The paper
- Antiplatelet treatment compared with anticoagulation treatment for cervical artery dissection (CADISS): a randomised trial. (2015). The Lancet Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(15)70018-9
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.