ArticleCureus2017
Deep Venous Reconstruction: A Case Series.
Article in Cureus, 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives This study aims to review a case series of deep venous reconstruction procedures performed at one centre by a single consultant. Methods A retrospective review of deep venous reconstruction procedures performed by a single consultant from 1994 to 2013 was carried out and all notes were reviewed for outcomes. A 58-month cumulative patency rate was calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Results Nineteen patients underwent deep venous reconstruction procedures including the Palma bypass, May-Husni bypass, femoral vein transposition and axillary vein transplant techniques from 1994 to 2013. Eleven patients were male and eight were female with a mean average age of 45.2 years (range 29-63). Clinical severity of disease ranged from C3 to C6, and 16 patients had a confirmed history of deep vein thrombosis. Cumulative primary patency rate for all reconstructions at 58 months was 89.5%, with two patients occluding and 17 remaining patent at last follow-up. Conclusion Deep venous reconstructions, particularly the Palma and May-Husni procedures, are feasible and can have good outcomes in patients failed by endovascular techniques and other more conservative therapies.
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.