Rand 2006.
Methods |
Country: Austria
Setting: hospital
Study design: RCT Level of randomisation: participant |
|
Participants |
No. of participants randomised: The study population consisted of 51 patients who were treated for critical chronic limb ischaemia (Fontaine stages III and IV), defined as rest pain, ischaemic ulcer, and gangrene. Patients with only claudication were not included in this study
Exclusions post randomisation: none Number of participants evaluated: 51 participants with 95 lesions: PTA group: 27 participants (53 lesions), stent group: 24 participants (42 lesions) Shifted to another arm: none Number of participants evaluated: 51; 44 were consecutively investigated and randomised at 1 centre to treatment of lesions by either PTA or stent application; 7 from 2 other centres were enrolled Age (mean), years: 72; mean age for the individual group not specified Gender: did not specify Inclusion criteria: chronic critical limb ischaemia stages III and IV of the Fontaine classification; isolated stenosis > 70% or occlusion of the tibial arteries; up to 3 lesions; lesions that were up to 3 cm with cumulative lesion length ≤ 9 cm, including the tibiofibular trunk, anterior and posterior tibial arteries, and fibular artery. There was no further limitation regarding lesion position. Patients with a significant inflow obstruction at the pelvic or superficial femoral artery level were not included Exclusion criteria: evidence of a systemic coagulopathy with anticoagulant and antiplatelet treatment contraindicated; previously implanted stents in the target lesion; total occlusion in the target vessel following the target lesion; without distal runoff; inflammatory vascular disease; peptic ulcer or gastric/intestinal bleeding in the previous 6 months; clinically assessed intolerance to contrast medium |
|
Interventions |
PTA group:
Stenting group:
Medication:
|
|
Outcomes |
Primary endpoint:
Secondary endpoints:
|
|
Notes | ||
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | High risk | Random number generation not described |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Numbered envelopes were prepared for one‐to‐one randomization to either PTA or primary stent placement. The randomization was performed per patient. Therefore, all lesions in a particular patient had to be treated by either PTA or primary stent placement" Type of envelope not described |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Not reported |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Data evaluation performed by the 2 readers in a double‐blinded fashion |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote: "Of the 51 patients, 2 patients died, 3 patients underwent amputation, 1 patient underwent major heart surgery, which did not allow further follow‐up, and 8 patients were lost to follow‐up" Survival analysis performed |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | None |
Other bias | Unclear risk | Quote: "Due to its main effect on early restenosis clopidogrel is given only to patients who have received stents and not to patients who underwent PTA, as early restenosis is not regarded a major problem in this patient group" Quote: "We also observed a higher incidence of PTAs than stent applications per patient. This might be due to a certain degree of investigator bias, as potentially one balloon can be used for several lesions in contrast to the necessity of one stent per lesion" Quote: "The study was supported by the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Radiologic Tumor Diagnosis and the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Interdisciplinary Vascular Research" |