SynthesisScientific reports2022
The comparison of efficacy and safety between transradial and transfemoral approach for chronic total occlusions intervention: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Transradial versus transfemoral access in diagnostic cerebral angiography: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complications.Neuroradiology · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Transradial and Transfemoral Access for Retrograde Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Comparison of the Clinical Features and Prognostic Implications.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This meta-analysis compared the outcomes of transradial access (TRA) and transfemoral access (TFA) in chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in recent decades. We searched multiple databases for articles published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020. Six observational studies with 11,736 patients were analyzed. Data included baseline demographics, Japan-chronic total occlusion (J-CTO) score, sheath size, PCI vessel, retrograde method, procedural time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume. The more prevalent target CTO vessel was the left coronary artery in the TRA group and the right coronary artery in the TFA group. Higher J-CTO score, longer procedural time, and more contrast volume were seen in the TFA group. In comparison, the TRA group had better procedural success rate (odds ratio (OR), 0.846; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.749-0.956) and less vascular complications (OR, 0.323; 95% CI 0.203-0.515), but similar retrograde success rate (OR, 0.965; 95% CI 0.382-2.435). In-hospital death (OR, 0.527; 95% CI 0.187-1.489) and major adverse cardiovascular events (OR, 0.729; 95% CI 0.504-1.054) did not differ between the groups. Overall, fewer vascular complications and higher procedural success rates were noted in the TRA CTO PCI population. However, similar retrograde success rates and clinical outcomes were noted between the groups.
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.