ArticleSurgery today2017
The impact of inflow treatment for claudicants with both aortoiliac and femoropopliteal occlusive disease.
Article in Surgery today, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated the early and long-term results of the sole use of endovascular treatment in the treatment of inflow lesions in claudicants with both aortoiliac and femoropopliteal (FP) lesions.
methodsA retrospective study that included 100 limbs in 73 patients was performed. The patency rates of aortoiliac artery stents, the continued clinical improvement rates, the risk factors for persistent disabling claudication after inflow revascularization, and the rates of freedom from additional FP procedures were examined.
resultAfter inflow revascularization, almost complete relief from intermittent claudication was seen in 79 % of the limbs, while 21 % of the limbs continued to suffer from disabling claudication. A multivariate analysis showed that a run-off score of ≥7 was an independent predictor for persistent disabling claudication after aortoiliac revascularization [hazard ratio (HR) 5.11, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.34-19.45; P = 0.02]. The primary patency rates at 1, 3, 5, and 6 years were 96, 96, 96 and 89 %, respectively. The secondary patency rate at 6 years was 100 %. The continued clinical improvement rates at 1, 3, 5, and 6 years were 81, 78, 78 and 72 %, respectively. The rates of freedom from additional FP procedures at 1, 3, 5, and 6 years were 97, 90, 90, and 90 %, respectively.
conclusionsAortoiliac endovascular revascularization is effective treating claudicants with both aortoiliac and femoropopliteal lesions. Furthermore, a run-off score of ≥7 appears to be a potential predictor for persistent disabling claudication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.