Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 488

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Appropriateness of Carotid Endarterectomy

Winslow, Constance M., Solomon, David H., Chassin, Mark R., Kosecoff, Jacqueline, Merrick, Nancy J., Brook, Robert H.·1988·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Carotid endarterectomy is a commonly performed but controversial procedure. We developed from the literature a list of 864 possible reasons for performing carotid endarterectomy, and asked a panel of nationally known experts to rate the appropriateness of each indication using a modified Delphi technique. On the basis of the panel's ratings, we determined the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy in a random sample of 1302 Medicare patients in three geographic areas who had had the procedure in 1981. Thirty-five percent of the patients in our sample had carotid endarterectomy for appropriate reasons, 32 percent for equivocal reasons, and 32 percent for inappropriate reasons. Of the patients having inappropriate surgery, 48 percent had less than 50 percent stenosis of the carotid artery that was operated on. Fifty-four percent of all the procedures were performed in patients without transient ischemic attacks in the carotid distribution. Of these procedures, 18 percent were judged appropriate, as compared with 55 percent judged appropriate in patients with transient ischemic attacks in the carotid distribution. After carotid endarterectomy, 9.8 percent of patients had a major complication (stroke with residual deficit at the time of hospital discharge or death within 30 days of surgery). We conclude that carotid endarterectomy was substantially overused in the three geographic areas we studied. Furthermore, in situations in which the complication rate is equal to or above the study's aggregate rate, carotid endarterectomy would not be warranted, even in cases with an appropriate indication, because the risks would almost certainly outweigh the benefits.

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 · 10.1056/nejm198803243181201

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.

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 488

Metadata

Authors
Winslow, C. M., Solomon, D. H., Chassin, M. R., Kosecoff, J., Merrick, N. J., & Brook, R. H.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1988-03-24
Volume
318
Issue
12
Pages
721-727
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2024112877
Cited by
488
References
0
FWCI
54.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: The Appropriateness of Carotid Endarterectomy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm198803243181201
The paper
Winslow, C. M., Solomon, D. H., Chassin, M. R., Kosecoff, J., Merrick, N. J., & Brook, R. H. (1988). The Appropriateness of Carotid Endarterectomy. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm198803243181201

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.