ArticleCVIR endovascular2026
Subgroup variations in effectiveness of femoropopliteal sirolimus versus paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty: post hoc results of the randomised SIRONA trial.
Article in CVIR endovascular, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04475783 (Head-to-Head Comparison of SIROlimus Versus Paclitaxel Drug-Eluting BallooN Angioplasty in the Femoropopliteal Artery), which is not on this 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.
Head-to-Head Comparison of SIROlimus Versus Paclitaxel Drug-Eluting BallooN Angioplasty in the Femoropopliteal Artery
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
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe randomised SIRONA trial showed that sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) angioplasty was non-inferior to paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty (PCB) regarding femoropopliteal primary patency. There was no difference in clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (cdTLR) rates between the treatment groups. This post-hoc analysis aimed to assess whether the overall results were consistent across different subgroups and selected post-baseline factors.
methodsPrimary patency at 12 months was assessed using duplex ultrasound and adjudicated by a core laboratory for 203 and 199 participants in the SCB and PCB groups, respectively (available-case intention-to-treat analysis). Data on 12-month cdTLR were available for 238 and 244 participants in the SCB and PCB groups, respectively. Odds ratios (ORs) for primary patency and hazard ratios (HRs) for cdTLR after SCB compared to PCB in non-pre-specified subgroups were assessed using generalised linear mixed models to control for centre effects, and Cox proportional hazards models, respectively.
resultsPrimary patency and cdTLR were generally consistent across the analysed subgroups. Two nominal interaction signals were observed. For cdTLR, a nominal interaction with age was identified (interaction p = 0.047); among participants older than 70 years, the estimated hazard ratio favoured SCB (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.16-1.71). For primary patency, treatment effects differed according to residual diameter stenosis (interaction p = 0.022); the estimated treatment effect favoured SCB in participants with residual diameter stenosis > 30% (OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.76-3.65). No other interactions between treatment and subgroup or post-baseline factors were observed.
conclusionThe effectiveness of SCB compared to PCB was similar and mainly consistent among subgroups. The evaluation should be considered exploratory.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04475783. Registered 17 July 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT4475783 .
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.