ArticleTranslational medicine @ UniSa
The Influence of Diabetes Mellitus on the Outcome of Superficial Femoral Artery Recanalization is Debatable.
Article in Translational medicine @ UniSa. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-World Efficacy of Minimally Invasive Revascularization in Diabetic Foot Ischemia: Impact of Device Selection and Lesion-Specific Factors.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Worse cardiovascular prognosis after endovascular surgery for intermittent claudication caused by infrainguinal atherosclerotic disease in patients with diabetes.Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2020Article
- Editorial: Health Technologies: a challenge to tackle in NETWORK.Translational medicine @ UniSaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Notwithstanding technological improvements in endovascular devices treatment of steno-obstructive lesions of the superficial femoral artery (SFA) remains a challenge for today's vascular surgeon. Current opinion dictates that the diabetic population may have worse outcome after revascularization of the lower extremities. Herein we examine the effects of endovascular treatment on steno-obstructive lesions of the SFA in diabetic and non-diabetic patients.
methodsA retrospective analysis was carried out on 110 patients who had undergone endovascular treatment of the SFA from 2010 to 2017 comparing outcomes in diabetic (DM)
results56 (50.9%) of the patients were diabetic and 54 were non-diabetic (49.1%). 52.7% (62.7% DM vs 35.2% nDM, p = 0.0003) were patients with critical limb ischemia. SFA occlusion was present in 65.5% (60.7% DM vs 70.4% nDM, p = 0.29) of all patients. All had undergone PTA of the SFA and 40.9% had received adjunctive stenting (44.6% DM vs 37.0% nDM, p = 0.41). A multilevel treatment was executed in 39.1% (51.8% DM vs 25.9% nDM) of the cases whereas an infra-popliteal procedure was associated in 27.3% (37.5% DM vs 16.7% nDM). In both groups the presence of diabetes was significantly associated (p = 0.005 e p = 0.014, respectively). Reintervention rate was 22.7%; 13 in the diabetic group (23.2%) and 12 in the non-diabetic group (22.2%). Of those who had had reintervention (p = 0.77); 9 patients (8.2%) had undergone an open surgical operation, 6 of whom had diabetes (p = 0.32). 5 patients (4.5%) had had major amputation, 4 of whom were diabetic (p = 0.20). Curves assessing freedom from target lesion restenosis were substantially overlapping between the two groups.
conclusionNo statistical associations between diabetes and reintervention or amputation rates were found. Indication to treat the SFA were not influenced by the presence of diabetes but further investigation is required to verify our hypothesis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32123674PMC7039259W3009820432What 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.