SynthesisBMC medical imaging2026
Pedal acceleration time as a diagnostic and prognostic tool in peripheral artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medical imaging, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWound healing in chronic limb-threatening ischaemia in peripheral artery disease (PAD) remains clinically challenging. Accurate perfusion assessment may predict limb outcomes. Standard measures ankle-brachial index (ABI) and transcutaneous oxygen pressure have limitations. The ABI, the guideline-recommended first-line diagnostic tool, has well-recognised limitations in patients. Pedal acceleration time (PAT), measured by duplex ultrasound from onset to peak arterial systole in the pedal arteries, shows promise as a prognostic marker, though its diagnostic and prognostic performance has not been fully validated. This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating PAT's diagnostic accuracy compared with ABI in detecting lower-limb ischaemia. Secondary objectives included assessing PAT's prognostic value for wound healing and amputation risk.
methodsThree electronic databases MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, were systematically searched for studies evaluating PAT values and wound healing in PAD patients. Wound healing incidence and PAT-ABI correlations were pooled according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy studies (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines. Pooled diagnostic indices, including sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Study quality was assessed using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Study Quality Assessment Tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional designs.
resultsSeventeen studies (1749 patients) were included as following: 8 cross-sectional, 1 observational prospective, 3 observational retrospective, 4 cohort (3 retrospective, 1 prospective), and 1 case-control study. PAT demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy with pooled 0.72 (95% CI 0.68-0.76) sensitivity, 0.84 (95% CI 0.79-0.88) specificity, 4.38 (95% CI 3.35-5.73) positive likelihood ratio, 0.25 (95% CI 0.19-0.33) negative likelihood ratio, and 14.85 (95% CI 10.02-22.01) diagnostic odds ratio, indicating robust discrimination compared to ABI. The selected studies, referring to the period 2019-2025, reported an association between higher PAT values and worse wound healing outcomes and increased amputation risk. Due to insufficient and non-standardised data, PAT's prognostic pooled analysis for wound healing was not feasible.
conclusionPAT accurately detected clinically significant lower-limb ischaemia compared to ABI. Faster PAT values correlated to higher ABI and favorable wound healing outcomes, whereas prolonged PAT indicated higher risk of non-healing wounds and major amputation. These results support PAT as a useful duplex-based complement to existing perfusion tests.
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.