ReviewFrontiers in surgery2025
Clinical comparison of transfemoral vs. distal transradial access for lower extremity arteriography.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and advantages of the distal transradial approach (dTRA) for assessing blood supply in patients with lower limb ulcers. Methods: This study analyzed 66 patients with chronic lower limb ulcers who underwent lower limb angiography between December 2023 and October 2024. Among them, 44 patients were in the transfemoral access (TFA) group, and 22 patients were in the dTRA group. The success rate of the procedure, contrast dosage, time consumed for contrast, postoperative complications, patient Satisfaction Score and objective analysis of image quality were recorded and statistically analysed using SPSS 22.0. Results: The analysis revealed that there was no statistically significant difference in the procedural success rates between the two groups, with the TFA group achieving a 95% success rate compared to 86% in the dTRA group ( Conclusions: The dTRA demonstrates diagnostic efficacy comparable to the TFA in evaluating lower limb blood supply in chronic lower limb ulcers patients, and significantly improves patient comfort with its minimally invasive access, early mobility, and low complication risk.
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.