Observational studyPloS one2019
Endovascular treatment of different types of iliac occlusions-Results from an observational study.
Observational study in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of aortoiliac disease stenting patency using balloon-expandable, self-expanding, and covered stents.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Femorofemoral artery bypass grafting in aortoiliac occlusive disease patients: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the results of endovascular therapy on the treatment of different types of iliac occlusions. MATERIALS AND
methodsA bi-center prospective, non-randomized study was conducted on 100 patients (mean age 59.14 ± 8.53; 64 men) who underwent endovascular treatment of iliac occlusive disease between January 2013 and November 2017. We evaluated baseline data, procedure, and follow-up results for the entire group, and according to Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC II) classification. The majority of patients (60%) were treated for severe claudication; 56 (56%) patients had TASC B occlusions, 28 patients TASC C, and 16 patients TASC D.
resultsThe mean length of the occluded segments was 61.41 ± 35.15 mm. Procedural complications developed in 6 patients (6%). Mean ankle-brachial pressure index increased from 0.40 ± 0.12 preoperatively to 0.82 ± 0.16 postoperatively. The mean follow-up was 33.18 ± 15.03 months. After 1 and 5 years, the primary patency rates were 98% and 75.1%, and the secondary patency rate was 97% respectively. Regarding occlusion complexity there were no statistical significant differences in primary patency rates (TASC B vs. C vs. D: p = 0.19). There were no statistically significant differences in primary patency rates between patients in different clinical stages, as well as between the type of stents, and location of the occlusion.
conclusionIn our study, endovascular treatment for iliac artery occlusions proved to be a safe and efficient approach with excellent primary and secondary patency rates regardless of the complexity of occlusions defined by TASC II classification. This study is aligned with the notion that in well selected patients, endovascular therapy can be the treatment of choice even in complex iliac lesions if performed by experienced endovascular interventionists in high volume centers.
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.