2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2011.07.052
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intraoperative hypotension, new onset atrial fibrillation, and adverse outcome after carotid endarterectomy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, previous studies have found that the rate of new-onset atrial fibrillation is very low (<3%) after carotid revascularization. 22,23 Therefore, the atrial fibrillation diagnoses are almost exclusively based on preprocedure diagnosis. Data are lacking on the anatomic factors, including severity of carotid artery stenosis, vessel tortuosity, vascular calcifications, and status of contralateral carotid artery, that are considered high-risk features for carotid interventions and important covariates to be included in the analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, previous studies have found that the rate of new-onset atrial fibrillation is very low (<3%) after carotid revascularization. 22,23 Therefore, the atrial fibrillation diagnoses are almost exclusively based on preprocedure diagnosis. Data are lacking on the anatomic factors, including severity of carotid artery stenosis, vessel tortuosity, vascular calcifications, and status of contralateral carotid artery, that are considered high-risk features for carotid interventions and important covariates to be included in the analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The influence of IOH has been confirmed in transplantation surgery. IOH is an independent predictor of kidney rejection [7], as well as the appearance of new onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) after carotid endarterectomy [8]. …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Forty studies were excluded as they did not meet the eligibility criteria. Finally, 11 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this SRMA (Figure 1) [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]. ese studies were analysed with respect to risk factors and outcomes associated with the perioperative AF.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding gender, eleven of the included studies consisting of 121,517 patients reported on gender (perioperative AF versus control: 2944 versus 118,573) [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]. ere was a higher incidence of perioperative AF in males versus females (perioperative AF versus control: 1556 versus 51692: 52.85% versus 43.59%; OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.54 to 1.62; I 2 : 84%; P < 0.0001) (Figure 3).…”
Section: Demographicsmentioning
confidence: 99%