ArticleThe British journal of surgery2025
Endovascular treatment of peripheral arterial disease: Endo-STAR framework for the design, conduct, and reporting of trials.
Article in The British journal of surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Comparative midterm outcomes of contemporary revascularization strategies for acute lower limb ischemia: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
39 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEndovascular technologies continue to evolve to meet the large and growing burden of peripheral arterial disease. The overall quality of published RCTs in endovascular treatments for peripheral arterial disease is low, resulting in uncertainty over treatment effectiveness. The aim of this study was to develop a framework to improve the design, conduct, and reporting of future clinical trials for infrainguinal endovascular treatments of peripheral arterial disease.
methodsThe authors undertook the design, development, and pilot testing of a novel framework. The study comprised four distinct phases. Phase 1 represented the development of a preliminary framework using content analysis of endovascular interventions described in previously published RCTs. Phase 2 consisted of focus groups with key stakeholders to further develop, revise, and achieve initial consensus on the framework. Phase 3 corresponded to the creation of a modified Delphi questionnaire to achieve final consensus on the framework. Phase 4 included cognitive interviews with professionals designing or undertaking endovascular lower limb trials to pilot test the framework.
resultsContent analysis of 228 endovascular interventions from 112 RCTs identified six key themes, relevant to endovascular peripheral arterial disease interventions, for the framework: expertise; setting; anaesthesia; imaging; intervention components (access; crossing lesion; treating lesion (lesion preparation; intervention; intervention optimization; bailout intervention; and treatment of non-target lesions); and closure of artery); and pharmacological interventions. Further refinements were made to the framework as a result of feedback from three focus groups and a Delphi questionnaire. The framework deconstructs an endovascular intervention into its component parts. The final framework can be accessed at www.endo-star.com. Pilot testing evaluated comprehension, clarity, and completeness of interpretation.
conclusionThe Endo-STAR framework deconstructs endovascular interventions into their key component parts and has been designed and pilot tested to enhance the quality of RCTs of endovascular interventions in peripheral arterial disease. It may be used to assist in developing future trial protocols, the standardization of infrainguinal endovascular interventions, the monitoring of adherence to the trial protocol, and as a standardized reporting guideline.
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.