Subintimal angioplasty with stenting vs remote endarterectomy: Technical success
Subintimal angioplasty with stenting showed no clear difference in technical success rate compared with remote endarterectomy (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Subintimal angioplasty with stenting vs remote endarterectomy Technical success rate · 95 people with Rutherford 3 to 5 TASC‐II D lesions Subintimal angioplasty with stenting showed no clear difference in technical success rate compared with remote endarterectomy (low certainty). Subintimal angioplasty for lower limb arterial chronic total occlusions (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.97 [0.88, 1.07] | 1 study · 95 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subintimal angioplasty for lower limb arterial chronic total occlusions 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.