PTA vs stent: Technical success
PTA probably leads to higher technical success ITT No. of limbs: 476 (5 RCTs) compared with stent (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
PTA vs stent Technical success ITT No. of limbs: 476 (5 RCTs) · people with infrapopliteal arterial lesions in chronic limb‐threatening ischaemia PTA probably leads to higher technical success ITT No. of limbs: 476 (5 RCTs) compared with stent (moderate certainty). Angioplasty versus stenting for infrapopliteal arterial lesions in chronic limb‐threatening ischaemia (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 3 [1.14, 7.93] | Not reported | Moderate |
PTA vs stent Technical success TA No. of limbs: 474 (5 RCTs) · people with infrapopliteal arterial lesions in chronic limb‐threatening ischaemia PTA probably leads to higher technical success TA No. of limbs: 474 (5 RCTs) compared with stent (moderate certainty). Angioplasty versus stenting for infrapopliteal arterial lesions in chronic limb‐threatening ischaemia (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 2.78 [1.04, 7.41] | Not reported | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Angioplasty versus stenting for infrapopliteal arterial lesions in chronic limb‐threatening ischaemia 2018 · 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.