SynthesisBMC surgery2022
Comparisons of outcomes of open surgery versus endovascular intervention for thrombotic popliteal artery aneurysm with acute lower limb ischemia: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 2022. 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.
- Article
- Article
- Symptomatic Popliteal Artery Aneurysms in Recently SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients: The Microangiopathic Thrombosis That Undermines Treatment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThrombotic popliteal artery aneurysm (PAA) with acute lower limb ischemia (ALI) is a serious disease leading to amputation. The choice of emergency procedures is not clearly defined, and the difference in therapeutic efficiency between open surgery and endovascular intervention is still unclear.
methodWe conducted a comprehensive search through PubMed, Wiley Online Library and ScienceDirect. According to the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, eligible articles were screened out, and all relevant data were extracted for further analysis. Our study was designed and developed based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Guideline. We critically assessed all included articles by Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklists and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS).
resultA total of 29 articles (1338 patients/1387 limbs) were included in the study. After a 1-year follow-up, the primary patency rate of the open surgery group was significantly lower than that of the endovascular intervention group (72.65 vs. 81.46%, P = 0.004), but without significant difference in the secondary patency rate (86.19 vs. 86.86%, P = 0.825). The limb salvage rate of the open surgery group was also significantly lower (83.07 vs. 98.25%, P < 0.001). After the 2-year follow-up, the primary patency rate of the open surgery group was still significantly lower (48.57 vs. 59.90%, P = 0.021).
conclusionThe outcome of endovascular intervention was better than that of open surgery especially in the 1-year limb salvage rate and primary patency rate at the 1-year and 2-year follow-ups.
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.