We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Systematic Review
A systematic review for the screening for peripheral arterial disease in asymptomatic patients.
Journal of Vascular Surgery 2015 March
BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is common and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. PAD can be detected through a noninvasive measurement of the ankle-brachial index (ABI).
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of several electronic bibliographic databases for studies that evaluated ABI as a screening test for PAD in asymptomatic individuals. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis, reporting pooled hazard ratios (HRs) when appropriate.
RESULTS: We included 40 individual studies, 2 systematic reviews, and 1 individual-patient data meta-analysis. We found no studies comparing ABI screening with no screening in terms of patient-important outcomes (mortality, amputations). The yield of PAD screening averaged 17% (range, 1%-42%) and was 1% to 4% in lower risk populations. Patients with PAD had higher adjusted risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 2.99; 95% confidence interval, 2.16-4.12) and of cardiovascular mortality (HR, 2.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.91-2.89). Data on benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of screening were limited; however, ABI screening was associated with additional prognostic information and risk stratification for heart disease. The overall quality of evidence supporting screening was low.
CONCLUSIONS: The current available evidence demonstrates that PAD is common in patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, but it does not support the benefit of routine ABI screening.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of several electronic bibliographic databases for studies that evaluated ABI as a screening test for PAD in asymptomatic individuals. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis, reporting pooled hazard ratios (HRs) when appropriate.
RESULTS: We included 40 individual studies, 2 systematic reviews, and 1 individual-patient data meta-analysis. We found no studies comparing ABI screening with no screening in terms of patient-important outcomes (mortality, amputations). The yield of PAD screening averaged 17% (range, 1%-42%) and was 1% to 4% in lower risk populations. Patients with PAD had higher adjusted risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 2.99; 95% confidence interval, 2.16-4.12) and of cardiovascular mortality (HR, 2.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.91-2.89). Data on benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of screening were limited; however, ABI screening was associated with additional prognostic information and risk stratification for heart disease. The overall quality of evidence supporting screening was low.
CONCLUSIONS: The current available evidence demonstrates that PAD is common in patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, but it does not support the benefit of routine ABI screening.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app