ArticleCardiovascular intervention and therapeutics2025
Results from a multicenter retrospective study of transradial iliac artery stenting in Japan.
Article in Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Standard and Non-standard Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Ischemic Heart Disease and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Clinical Review.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Review
- Clinical outcomes of endovascular therapy for aortoiliac artery chronic total occlusion via the transradial approach.CVIR endovascular · 2025Article
- Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Acute Cardiovascular Care.Circulation reports · 2025Review
- Antithrombotic Management in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Updated Clinical Review.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large-scale multicenter studies demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of transradial iliac artery stenting are lacking. We evaluated the data from a multicenter database in Japan. Transradial iliac artery stenting was performed on 115 lesions in 105 patients. The approach site was determined at the discretion of the operator. Patients with scheduled multiple sheath insertions for the bidirectional approach were excluded. Clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. The average age of this cohort was 71.1 ± 8.3 years. Eighty-six patients (81.9%) were male. Diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and smoking habit were present in 39 (37.1%), 84 (80.0%), 69 (65.7%), and 78 patients (74.3%), respectively. Rutherford classifications 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 comprised 40 (34.8%), 42 (36.5%), 28 (24.3%), 3 (2.6%), and 2 (1.7%) lesions, respectively, while Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II classifications A, B, C, and D comprised 74 (64.3%), 21 (18.3%), 15 (13.0%), and 5 (4.3%), respectively. Twenty-seven lesions (23.5%) had chronic total occlusion. All lesions were successfully treated with 141 stents. Four patients (3.8%) required additional puncture of the common femoral artery for successful stent implantation. The ankle-brachial index significantly improved from 0.65 ± 0.17 to 0.95 ± 0.15 (P < 0.0001). None of the patients experienced any procedural or access site-related complications. Asymptomatic radial artery occlusion was observed in three cases (2.9%) after the procedure. There were no target lesion revascularizations or complications at 1 month. Compared to the traditional transfemoral approach, transradial iliac artery stenting is safe and feasible without any specific complications in carefully selected patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39012574What 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.