SynthesisPloS one2023
Meta-analysis of outcomes from drug-eluting stent implantation in femoropopliteal arteries.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- S.M.A.R.T. Flex vascular stent system in femoropopliteal arteries: 18-month result of a real-world registry.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn recent years, studies of drug-eluting stent (DES) for femoropopliteal artery diseases (FPADs) have been gradually published. To explore whether this type of stent is superior to the traditional bare metal stent (BMS), we performed this study.
methodsA systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in Excerpta Medica Database (Embase), PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), and Cochrane Library was performed on November 29, 2022. We innovatively adopted the hazard ratio (HR), the most appropriate indicator, as a measure of the outcomes that fall under the category of time-to-event data. The HRs was extracted directly or indirectly. Then, the meta-analyses using random effects model were performed. The bias risks of included papers were assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. This study was registered on the PROSPER platform (CRD42023391944) and not funded.
resultsSeven RCTs involving 1,889 participants were found. After pooled analyses, we obtained results without propensity on each of the following 3 outcomes of interest: in-stent restenosis (ISR) -free survival, primary patency (PP) survival, and target lesion revascularization (TLR) -free survival (P >0.05, respectively). Because the results of pooled analyses of the other two outcomes of interest (all-cause death free survival and clinical benefit survival) had high heterogeneity both, they were not accepted by us.
conclusionFor FPADs, the DES has not yet demonstrated superiority or inferiority to BMS, in the ability to maintain PP, avoid ISR and TLR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.