Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

12 questions · 18 findings · 1 reviews · Vascular

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 2 · 11.1%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 3 · 16.7%Moderate 10 · 55.6%High 3 · 16.7%

Endovascular revascularisation vs no therapy

Maximum walking distance · intermittent claudication

2 findings from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 125 participants
Moderate
Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 103 participants
Low

Endovascular revascularisation vs conservative therapy

Pain‐free walking distance · intermittent claudication

2 findings from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 147 participants
Moderate
Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
5 studies · 345 participants
Moderate

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 vs conservative therapy

Disease‐specific quality of life · intermittent claudication

1 finding from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 301 participants
High

Endovascular revascularisation vs no therapy

Pain‐free walking distance · intermittent claudication

2 findings from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 125 participants
Moderate
Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 103 participants
Low

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

Endovascular revascularisation vs no therapy

Disease‐specific quality of life · intermittent claudication

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Endovascular revascularisation vs conservative therapy

Maximum walking distance · intermittent claudication

2 findings from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
5 studies · 345 participants
Moderate
Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 184 participants
Moderate

Endovascular revascularisation plus conservative therapy vs conservative therapy

Maximum walking distance · intermittent claudication

2 findings from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 432 participants
Moderate
Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 106 participants
Low

Endovascular revascularisation plus conservative therapy vs conservative therapy

Pain‐free walking distance · intermittent claudication

2 findings from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 305 participants
Moderate
Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

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 plus conservative therapy vs conservative therapy

Disease‐specific quality of life · intermittent claudication

1 finding from 1 review

Endovascular revascularisation versus conservative management for intermittent claudication 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 330 participants
Moderate