Sakshi Dixit
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Sakshi Dixit has a total of 13 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Fnu Anamika
Cleveland Clinic Akron General, Akron, OH 44307, USA
2 shared publications - Akiva Rosenzveig
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart, Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA
1 shared publication - Anmol Multani
Department of Cardiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA
1 shared publication - Aravinda Nanjundappa
Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland, USA
1 shared publication - Ashish Aneja
Associate Professor, Department of Cardiology, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine
1 shared publication - Bargavi Kathirvel
Department of Cardiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
Carotid Artery Stenting: Evolution, Evidence, and Contemporary Practice in the Era of Intensive Medical Therapy
Carotid artery stenosis remains a major cause of ischemic stroke worldwide, and its management continues to evolve in parallel with advances in surgical, endovascular, and medical therapies. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) was established as the standard of care for symptomatic high-grade stenosis following landmark randomized trials, while carotid artery stenting (CAS) subsequently emerged as a less invasive alternative for appropriately selected patients. This review aims to summarize the historical evolution of carotid artery stenting, critically appraise evidence from major clinical trials comparing CAS and CEA, and examine contemporary practice patterns in the era of intensive medical therapy. A comprehensive review of randomized trials, registries, guideline statements, and recent literature was performed to synthesize current evidence regarding procedural outcomes, patient selection, and emerging technologies, including transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). Large, randomized trials have demonstrated comparable long-term composite outcomes between CAS and CEA in selected patients, although peri-procedural risk profiles differ, with higher stroke risk observed after CAS and higher myocardial infarction rates after CEA. Technological advancements in embolic protection devices, stent platforms, and alternative access strategies have further refined endovascular approaches. Concurrently, improvements in intensive medical therapy—including lipid-lowering, antiplatelet therapy, blood pressure control, smoking cessation, and lifestyle modification—have substantially reduced overall stroke risk, particularly in asymptomatic patients. In the contemporary era, optimal stroke prevention requires individualized, multidisciplinary decision-making that integrates symptom status, anatomical complexity, comorbid conditions, procedural expertise, and sustained long-term vascular risk factor management following revascularization.
Open AccessCarotid Artery Stenting: Evolution, Evidence, and Contemporary Practice in the Era of Intensive Medical Therapy
Carotid artery stenosis remains a major cause of ischemic stroke worldwide, and its management continues to evolve in parallel with advances in surgical, endovascular, and medical therapies. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) was established as the standard of care for symptomatic high-grade stenosis following landmark randomized trials, while carotid artery stenting (CAS) subsequently emerged as a less invasive alternative for appropriately selected patients. This review aims to summarize the historical evolution of carotid artery stenting, critically appraise evidence from major clinical trials comparing CAS and CEA, and examine contemporary practice patterns in the era of intensive medical therapy. A comprehensive review of randomized trials, registries, guideline statements, and recent literature was performed to synthesize current evidence regarding procedural outcomes, patient selection, and emerging technologies, including transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). Large, randomized trials have demonstrated comparable long-term composite outcomes between CAS and CEA in selected patients, although peri-procedural risk profiles differ, with higher stroke risk observed after CAS and higher myocardial infarction rates after CEA. Technological advancements in embolic protection devices, stent platforms, and alternative access strategies have further refined endovascular approaches. Concurrently, improvements in intensive medical therapy—including lipid-lowering, antiplatelet therapy, blood pressure control, smoking cessation, and lifestyle modification—have substantially reduced overall stroke risk, particularly in asymptomatic patients. In the contemporary era, optimal stroke prevention requires individualized, multidisciplinary decision-making that integrates symptom status, anatomical complexity, comorbid conditions, procedural expertise, and sustained long-term vascular risk factor management following revascularization.
- 3 April 2026
- Published by Elsevier in Current Problems in Cardiology
- Vol. 51 (8) , 103339
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement at metropolitan teaching hospitals among patients with heart failure
- 3 April 2026
- Published by Elsevier in Current Problems in Cardiology
- Vol. 51 (8) , 103339
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement at metropolitan teaching hospitals among patients with heart failure