ReviewJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2025
Comparison of Endovascular Interventions for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery Disease: A Network Meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To understand the relative safety and efficacy of endovascular treatment modalities used for superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare outcomes between percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA), atherectomy (A), bare metal stent (BMS), brachytherapy/radiotherapy, covered stent graft (CSG), cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA), drug-coated balloon (DCB), drug-eluting stent (DES), and intravascular lithotripsy (L). Methods: We performed a systematic literature search of PubMed from January 2000 to January 2023 to identify randomized trials comparing endovascular interventions for the treatment of SFA disease. The primary end points were technical success and 12-month primary patency. Results: In total, 57 studies (9089 patients) were included. The mean age of the included patients was 68.4 years, 41.4% had diabetes, 18.3% had critical limb ischemia, and 81.3% had de novo lesions. A mean of 1.2 lesions were treated per patient. Technical success was superior for CSG, BMS, and A+DCB compared with PTA, while A+DCB and CSG were superior to DCB. All interventions except brachytherapy alone had superior primary patency compared with PTA. There were no significant differences in 12-month mortality or major amputation. All interventions except L+DCB, PTA+A, and CBA were superior to PTA regarding target lesion revascularization, while only DCB, DES, and BMS were better than PTA at improving Rutherford classification. Conclusions: In SFA disease, PTA alone is mostly inferior to other endovascular techniques. This comparison of other endovascular techniques will be valuable for endovascular device selection in the treatment of SFA disease.
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.