Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37498966›Full record

SynthesisBJS open2023

Vascular complications of ProGlide versus Prostar in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures: meta-analysis.

Yuwei Xiang, Chen Chen, Jichun Zhao, Yukui Ma, Bin Huang, Zhoupeng Wu

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BJS open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yuwei XiangDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Chen ChenDivision of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jichun ZhaoDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yukui MaDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Bin HuangDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Zhoupeng WuDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the vascular complications of ProGlide and Prostar in percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

methodsElectronic databases were searched in July 2022 for studies that compared the vascular complications of ProGlide and Prostar for percutaneous closure in transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The primary outcome was major vascular complications and the secondary outcomes were minor vascular complications, types of access-site vascular complications, device failure, and additional intervention. Estimates of relative effects were pooled to generate ORs and their 95 per cent c.i. using a random-effects model. The risk of bias in non-randomized comparative studies was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions ('ROBINS-I') tool.

resultsNine studies were identified and a total of 7529 patients were included. Among them, 4144 patients received ProGlide and 3385 received Prostar. The pooled data showed that the risk of major vascular complications was significantly lower with ProGlide versus Prostar (OR 0.50, 95 per cent c.i. 0.32 to 0.78). Regarding the types of vascular complications, vascular trauma was the most common complication and the risk was similar between groups (OR 1.02, 95 per cent c.i. 0.55 to 1.91). ProGlide had a lower risk of bleeding complications (OR 0.46, 95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.94), but a higher risk of ischaemia complications (OR 1.90, 95 per cent c.i. 1.10 to 3.27). The risk of device failure was lower in the ProGlide group (OR 0.45, 95 per cent c.i. 0.21 to 0.95). Both groups had a similar risk of having additional interventions for vascular complications (OR 1.02, 95 per cent c.i. 0.75 to 1.39). The use of ProGlide was associated with a lower risk of additional surgical treatments (OR 0.52, 95 per cent c.i. 0.34 to 0.80), but a higher risk of endovascular treatments (OR 2.69, 95 per cent c.i. 1.29 to 5.63).

conclusionIn percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedures, ProGlide has superior safety and efficacy when compared with Prostar; it is associated with fewer major vascular complications and device failures. The vascular complications of ProGlide are more likely to be dealt with using endovascular treatments than surgical treatments.

Indexed as

Aortic Valve StenosisCardiovascular DiseasesTranscatheter Aortic Valve ReplacementVascular Closure DevicesAortic ValveHumansTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID37498966
PMCPMC10373905
OpenAlexW4385330185

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.