ArticleCardiovascular intervention and therapeutics2025
Comparable clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing endovascular treatment for aorto-iliac or femoropopliteal lesions.
Article in Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lower extremity peripheral arterial disease is usually a consequence of advanced atherosclerosis, leading to high mortality and morbidity. Although clinical characteristics and outcomes may differ among patients having peripheral disease in different arterial territories, contemporary data are scarce. From January 2019 to December 2022, this multicenter registry study included 712 patients undergoing endovascular treatment (EVT) for either aorto-iliac (AI) or femoropopliteal (FP) lesions. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between AI-EVT and FP-EVT groups. Clinical endpoints included major adverse cardiovascular events, major adverse limb events (MALE), and all-cause mortality, stratified by chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Of the 712 patients, 217 (30.5%) and 495 (69.5%) underwent AI-EVT or FP-EVT. Patients undergoing AI-EVT were more likely to be men and current smokers, while diabetes was more frequent in the FP-EVT group. The prevalence of CLTI was significantly higher in the FP-EVT group. In the entire study population, the FP-EVT rather than the AI-EVT group had a significantly higher rate of MALE and mortality, but the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was similar between the two groups. When focusing only on patients without CLTI, the mortality risk was similar, while the MALE risk was still higher in the FP-EVT group. In conclusion, patients undergoing EVT for AI and FP lesions in contemporary settings were differently characterized by baseline factors. Although the worse clinical outcomes in the FP-EVT group were mainly driven by the higher prevalence of CLTI, the MALE risk was still increased in patients without CLTI.
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.