ReviewJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2024
Different drugs in drug-eluting stents for peripheral artery disease: a systematic evaluation and Bayesian meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2024. 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, 1 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
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Drug-eluting stents (DESs) have become the first-line treatment for symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Currently, there are many types of DESs on the market. The same type of DESs has different concentrations, and various drugs in them show uneven efficacy. The selection of DESs remains controversial. This study was aimed at comparing the long-term real-world outcomes of different DESs in the treatment of peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD). The databases including Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed were searched with a time frame until March 25, 2023. The primary patency (PP) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 6 months were used as the primary endpoints. A total of 32 studies (5467 patients) were eligible. At the six-month follow-up, DES-Evero 1 ug/mm2 ranked first in terms of PP, with a significant difference from BMSs (RR [95% CI] = 1.6). DES-Siro 0.9 ug/mm2, DES-Siro 1.4 ug/mm2, DES-Siro 1.95 ug/mm2, DES-PTX 0.167 ug/mm2, DES-PTX 1 ug/mm2 and covered stents (CSs) showed significantly better PPs than BMSs. In terms of TLR, DES-Siro 0.9 ug/mm2 (0.31) ranked first, and DES-Evero 1 ug/mm2 ranked last. Among the treatment modalities for PAD, different DESs showed overall encouraging results in improving PP and TLR compared with BMSs. DES-Evero 1 ug/mm2 showed the best PP, but it had the highest reintervention rate at 6 months. Sirolimus-eluting stents were not always more effective with higher concentrations of sirolimus. Among various DESs, sirolimus-eluting stents and everolimus-eluting stents were superior to paclitaxel-eluting stents.
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.