Skip to main content
. 2014 Jun 23;2014(6):CD000190. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000190.pub3

AbuRahma 2010.

Methods Method of randomisation: unknown
Concealment: sealed envelops that were opened just before surgery
 Not blind
 Cross‐overs: none (ITT analysis)
 Exclusions during trial: none
 Loss to follow‐up: none
Participants USA
 200 participants, 200 operations
 Routine shunting: 98 operations
 Selective shunting: 102 operations
 Age: 45 to 89 years, mean 68 years
 Sex: 48% male, 52% female
 Comparability: age, sex, vascular risk factors similar between 2 groups
 More asymptomatic ipsilateral arteries in routine shunting group: 58% versus 53%
 Contralateral artery stenosis (mean %) routine shunting group: 38%; selective shunting group: 40%
Interventions Treatment: selective shunting group; shunt selected if systolic stump pressure < 40 mmHg
 Control: routine shunting group
 All operations under general anaesthetic; unknown patching rate
Outcomes TIA, stroke, combined stroke/TIA, death, bleeding, myocardial infarction, congestive, heart failure, asymptomatic carotid thrombosis, recurrent laryngeal injury, all complications, number of shunted artery
Notes Exclusion: none
 Follow‐up: 30 days
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "200 CEA patients were randomised into"
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "Randomization was done using sealed envelopes that were open just before surgery"
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes High risk Not reported
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes High risk Not reported
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk No loss to follow‐up
Selective reporting (reporting bias) High risk Study authors did not report prespecified outcome
Other bias High risk Not reported