1,720,962 research outputs found

    Dual- vs single-layer stents for endovascular treatment of symptomatic and asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis

    No full text
    Backgrounds: Plaque protrusion is a common event among carotid artery stenting (CAS) patients and increases ischemic complication risk. Dual-layer stents (DLS) with micromesh technology may offer greater plaque protection compared to single-layer stents (SLS), but few data are available. The aim of the study is to compare clinical outcomes at 12 months for asymptomatic and symptomatic patients treated for primary CAS with DLS or SLS in a high-volume center. Methods: A retrospective analysis of consecutive symptomatic and asymptomatic patients treated with primary CAS for internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis, with either DLS or SLS between 2015 and 2019, was performed. Primary endpoints included rates of ipsilateral transient ischemic attacks (TIA)/stroke and death within 1-year from CAS. Secondary endpoints included patency rates and survival according to stent type. Results: Of the 301 patients who met inclusion criteria (74.8 % male; 73.6 mean age ± 8.7 years), most patients were asymptomatic (77.4 %). Among all patients DLS was most frequently deployed (66 %); also, among asymptomatic (62 %) and symptomatic patients (81 %), p < 0.01. Symptomatic patients had less comorbidities and severe disease than asymptomatic patients. Six peri-operative strokes were recorded and, within 1 year, 2 additional strokes were registered among symptomatic patients treated with SLS. No post-operative strokes were encountered in the DLS group (p = 0.04) among symptomatic patients. Higher rates of TIA were observed among asymptomatic patients treated with DLS compared to SLS while rates of TIA were reduced among symptomatic patients treated with DLS. There were no differences in patency rates for DLS and SLS in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Primary patency was similar among DLS stent types but differed among SLS stent types (p = 0.01). At a mean follow-up of 27 months ±17.6, survival was comparable between DLS and SLS groups (p = 0.98). Conclusion: CAS with DLS seems to reduce the risk of post-procedural stroke for symptomatic patients compared to SLS whilst the choice of stent did not influence ipsilateral TIA, survival or patency rates. These data require confirmation from larger, randomized, prospective studies

    Endovascular treatment for restenosis of carotid venous bypass graft: a clinical case report

    No full text
    Restenosis after open carotid surgery (OCS) represents an issue that experts are very often facing nowadays, both after carotid endoarterectomy(CEA) and carotid bypass(CB). Yet, even if from one side carotid artery stenting (CAS) is currently recommended by most guidelines as treatment of choice for carotid restenosis after CEA, on the other side little is known regarding the best treatment of restenosis after CB. This clinical case report is aimed to empathize the endovascular treatment as an effective therapeutic option for restenosis after OCS

    Thirty-day outcomes of carotid endarterectomy versus carotid artery stenting in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients: a propensity score-matched analysis

    No full text
    Background: Technological and surgical approaches to carotid artery stenting (CAS) have evolved. Modern randomised controlled trials comparing CAS and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) are limited, and information about updated post-intervention outcomes are mostly from retrospective, small studies. Aims: This study aims to compare the 30-day outcomes of stroke, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and death with propensity-matched groups of CEA and CAS in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients over a recent study period of new CAS technologies and approaches. Methods: A retrospective, observational, multicentre analysis was conducted including consecutive symptomatic and asymptomatic patients treated with either primary CEA or CAS for internal carotid artery stenosis, between 2015 and 2022. Patients were propensity score-matched based on comorbidities and assessed according to symptom status. Primary endpoints include composite ipsilateral stroke, TIA, AMI and death within 30 days. Secondary endpoints include technical success and length of hospital stay. Results: From a cohort of 1,110 patients, propensity matching produced 269 distinct treatment pairs (n=538). Most patients were asymptomatic (n=456, 85%). All 6 strokes were minor (CEA=2; CAS=4) and registered among asymptomatic patients. One AMI (CEA) and 1 patient death (CAS) were reported among symptomatic patients. Composite stroke/AMI/death were not significantly different between both types of symptom status and both revascularisation techniques (p=0.44 and p=1, respectively). Technical success was 100%. The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in asymptomatic patients treated with CAS compared to those treated with CEA (p=0.05), but no difference was registered among symptomatic patients (p=0.32). Conclusions: Propensity-matched analysis suggests that CAS has similar postprocedural outcomes for stroke, AMI and death at 30 days compared to CEA

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed

    Variations on the Author

    Full text link
    “Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship

    Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis

    Full text link
    We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis

    Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts

    Full text link
    We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more sophisticated methods
    corecore