Mini-skin longitudinal incision versus traditional longitudinal incision for carotid endarterectomy in patients with carotid artery stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) remains the gold standard intervention for stroke prevention in patients with carotid artery stenosis but the surgical technique continues evolving with research being conducted on minimally invasive alternatives. Mini-skin incision CEA has emerged as a more aesthetically appealing and less painful alternative to the traditional technique with a potential impact on main procedural events. We aimed to provide a review of the literature and to compare the mini-skin incision with the traditional approach. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: July 2023. Procedural stroke, cranial/cervical nerves injury and mortality were defined as primary outcomes and length of hospitalization and minor complications as secondary outcomes. We included manuscripts comparing mini-skin with traditional incision CEA, and reporting our pre-established outcomes. The quality of studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We assessed heterogeneity and performed a meta-analysis for quantitative analysis when appropriate. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Five studies comprising a total of 2912 CEA procedures (2738 patients; 75.7% males) were included in both the qualitative and quantitative analysis. Compared with the traditional CEA, mini-skin incision led to a statistically significant decrease in periprocedural cranial/cervical nerve injury (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.21, 0.43; P<0.01). Length of hospital stay and minor complications were significantly decreased in the mini-skin incision group (P<0.05). Concerning 30-day stroke rate and mortality no differences were attained. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that mini-skin incision CEA might be a safer approach, with the potential to significantly decrease the perioperative morbidity. Further studies are needed to confirm these preliminary findings and to reinforce the role of mini-skin incision CEA as a promising, less invasive alternative in the treatment armamentarium of carotid artery stenosis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".