Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty for Below-the-Elbow Critical Hand Ischemia: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review assessing the safety and efficacy of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) for treatment of critical hand ischemia (CHI) due to below-the-elbow (BTE) obstructive arterial disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE systematic searches were performed from inception to December 2020 to identify studies assessing PTA for management of BTE obstructive arterial disease. Three independent reviewers performed abstract selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess individual study bias for non-randomized controlled trials. RESULTS: Eight studies comprising 176 patients with obstructive BTE vessel disease were included. All studies had a score >5 on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, indicative of high quality. All studies used low-profile balloons (1.5-4 mm) for PTA of stenotic lesions or chronic total occlusions (CTOs). The weighted average technical success and clinical success rates were 89.3% (range = 82%-100%) and 69.9% (range = 19%-100%), respectively, at a mean follow-up of 29.7 ± 17.1 months. The short-term (<30 days) complication rate was low at 4.7% and most commonly included access site hematomas, pseudoaneurysms, and radial artery perforation or re-thrombosis. Nearly 20% of patients required an amputation, and most (96%) were minor (either distal phalanges or digits). Only 2 patients required above-wrist amputations. The primary and secondary patency rate at 5 years were 38% and 54%, respectively. The cumulative 5-year mortality rate was 33.1%. CONCLUSIONS: PTA for CHI due to BTE obstructive arterial disease is feasible with a high technical success rate and a low short-term complication rate. Additional long-term comparative studies are required to unequivocally establish the clinical benefit of endovascular treatment compared with conservative management or surgical bypass.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".