Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

3 questions · 3 findings · 1 reviews · Vascular

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 1 · 33.3%High 2 · 66.7%

Endovascular revascularisation vs conservative therapy

Secondary invasive interventions · intermittent claudication

Endovascular revascularisation showed no clear difference in secondary invasive interventions compared with conservative therapy (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.4 [0.7, 2.8]
4 studies · 395 participants
High

Endovascular revascularisation plus conservative therapy vs conservative therapy

Secondary invasive interventions · intermittent claudication

Endovascular revascularisation plus conservative therapy leads to lower secondary invasive interventions compared with conservative therapy alone (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.27 [0.13, 0.55]
3 studies · 457 participants
High

Endovascular revascularisation vs no therapy

Secondary invasive interventions · intermittent claudication

Endovascular revascularisation showed no clear difference in secondary invasive interventions compared with no specific therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.81 [0.12, 5.28]
2 studies · 118 participants
Moderate