ArticlePloS one2022
Comparison of arterial and venous allograft bypass in chronic limb-threatening ischemia.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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, 6 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
introductionFemoro-popliteal bypass with autologous vascular graft is a key revascularization method in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). However, the lack of suitable autologous conduit may occur in 15-45% of the patients, necessitating the implantation of prosthetic or allogen grafts. Only little data is available on the outcome of allograft use in CLTI.
aimsOur objective were to evaluate the long term results of infrainguinal allograft bypass surgery in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and compare the results of arterial and venous allografts.
methodsSingle center, retrospective study analysing the outcomes of infrainguinal allograft bypass surgery in patients with CLTI between January 2007 and December 2017.
resultsDuring a 11-year period, 134 infrainguinal allograft bypasses were performed for CLTI [91 males (67.9%)]. Great saphenous vein (GSV) was implanted in 100 cases, superficial femoral artery (SFA) was implanted in 34 cases. Early postoperative complications appeared in 16.4% of cases and perioperative mortality (<30 days) was 1.4%. Primary patency at one, three and five years was 59%, 44% and 41%, respectively, while secondary patency was 60%, 45% and 41%, respectively. Primary patency of the SFA allografts was significantly higher than GSV allografts (1 year: SFA: 84% vs. GSV: 51% p = 0,001; 3 years: SFA: 76% vs. GSV: 32% p = 0,001; 5 years: SFA: 71% vs. GSV: 30% p = 0.001). Both primary and secondary patency of SFA allograft implanted in below-knee position were significantly higher than GSV bypasses (p = 0.0006; p = 0.0005, respectively). Limb salvage at one, three and five years following surgery was 74%, 64% and 62%, respectively. Long-term survival was 53% at 5 years.
conclusionAllograft implantation is a suitable method for limb salvage in CLTI. The patency of arterial allograft is better than venous allograft patency, especially in below-knee position during infrainguinal allograft bypass surgery.
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.