Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42381494›Full record

Trial reportHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2026

Plain balloon angioplasty +/- bare metal stenting versus drug-coated balloon angioplasty +/- bare metal stenting versus primary drug-eluting stenting in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischaemia: BASIL-3, an open-label, three-arm, randomised, multi-centre, phase 3 trial.

Matthew A Popplewell, Jack A Hall, Jesse Kigozi, Mishal Javed, Lewis Meecham, Gareth R Bate, Lisa Kelly, Jonathan J Deeks, Catherine A Moakes, Andrew W Bradbury

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Matthew A PopplewellDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, Murray Learning Centre Building, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6239-4039
Jack A HallBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, Department of Applied Health Sciences, Public Health Building, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3016-7624
Jesse KigoziHealth Economics Unit, Department of Applied Health Sciences, Public Health Building, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7608-4923
Mishal JavedHealth Economics Unit, Department of Applied Health Sciences, Public Health Building, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0009-0007-5095-4231
Lewis MeechamDepartment of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4698-7333
Gareth R BateDepartment of Vascular Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Heartlands Hospital, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0009-0005-3084-070X
Lisa KellyDepartment of Vascular Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Heartlands Hospital, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0009-0000-0105-1967
Jonathan J DeeksDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, Murray Learning Centre Building, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8850-1971
Catherine A MoakesBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, Department of Applied Health Sciences, Public Health Building, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0473-0532
Andrew W BradburyDepartment of Vascular Surgery, University of Birmingham, Public Health Building, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0530-9667

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To determine which primary endovascular revascularisation strategy represents the most clinical and cost-effective treatment for patients with chronic limb threatening ischaemia who require an endovascular femoro-popliteal, with or without an infra-popliteal revascularisation. Design: Three-arm open-label pragmatic multicentre randomised phase 3 superiority trial. Setting: Thirty-five UK NHS vascular units. Participants: Patients with chronic limb threatening ischaemia who required an endovascular femoro-popliteal with or without an infra-popliteal revascularisation. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned (1 : 1 : 1) to either a femoro-popliteal plain balloon angioplasty with or without bare metal stenting (considered as control or reference), or a drug-coated balloon angioplasty with or without bare metal stenting, or a drug-eluting stenting first revascularisation strategy. Methods: The primary outcome was amputation-free survival defined as time to first major amputation or death from any cause. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, limb salvage, major adverse limb events, major adverse cardiac events and other pre-specified clinical and patient reported outcome measures. Serious adverse events were collected up to 30 days following the first revascularisation procedure. Results: Between 29 January 2016 and 31 August 2021, 481 participants [167 (35%) women] of mean age 71.8 years (standard deviation 10.8) were randomised. Major amputation or death occurred in 106 of 160 (66%) participants in the plain balloon angioplasty ± bare metal stenting group, 97 of 161 (60%) participants in the drug-coated balloon angioplasty ± bare metal stenting, and 93 of 159 (58%) participants in the drug-eluting stenting group [adjusted hazard ratios: plain balloon angioplasty ± bare metal stenting vs. drug-coated balloon angioplasty ± bare metal stenting: 0.84 (97.5% confidence interval 0.61 to 1.16), Conclusions: Neither drug-coated balloon angioplasty ± bare metal stenting, nor drug-eluting stenting, conferred significant clinical benefit over plain balloon angioplasty ± bare metal stenting when used in the femoro-popliteal segment in patients undergoing femoro-popliteal ± infra-popliteal endovascular revascularisation for chronic limb threatening ischaemia. Drug-eluting stenting and drug-coated balloon angioplasty in chronic limb threatening ischaemia patients were found to offer moderate benefits in health economic outcomes particularly when drug-eluting stenting was compared to plain balloon angioplasty. Funding: This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 13/81/02.

Indexed as

Angioplasty, BalloonChronic Limb-Threatening IschemiaDrug-Eluting StentsStentsAgedAmputation, SurgicalCost-Benefit AnalysisCost-Effectiveness AnalysisFemaleHumansLimb SalvageMaleMetalsMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalMetalsANGIOPLASTYCHRONIC LIMB THREATENING ISCHAEMIADRUG ELUTING TECHNOLOGYSTENTING

Identifiers

PMID42381494
PMCPMC13334417

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.