Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2011 Dec 18;152(51):2047-55.
doi: 10.1556/OH.2011.29277.

[Effectiveness of prostanoids in patients with critical leg ischemia]

[Article in Hungarian]
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

[Effectiveness of prostanoids in patients with critical leg ischemia]

[Article in Hungarian]
Valentin Brodszky et al. Orv Hetil. .

Abstract

Prostanoids (alprostadil and iloprost) are used for the treatment of patients with critical limb ischemia in whom revascularization procedure is inadequate or proved to be unsuccessful. According to a Cochrane analysis (CD006544) prostanoids differ in their effects on rest-pain relief and ulcer healing.

Objectives: To study the efficacy and safety of prostanoids for critical limb ischemia.

Methods: Systematic literature search and meta-analysis (mixed treatment comparison) was performed.

Results: Seven randomized controlled trials including 964 patients were analyzed. Compared to placebo, both alprostadil (OR: 3.2 95% CI: 1.7-5.5 and OR: 1.8 95% CI: 0.6-4.3) and iloprost (OR: 2.7 95% CI: 1.7-4.2 and OR: 2.5 95% CI: 1.0-5.4) were more efficacious with regard to rest-pain relief and ulcer healing and the difference between the two prostanoids was not significant (OR: 1.2 95% CI: 0.7-1.9 and OR: 0.74 95% CI: 0.3-1.5). Adverse events occurred significantly more often with both drugs compared to placebo, however, they were less frequent with alprostadil than with iloprost (OR 0.2 95% CI: 0.1-0.3).

Conclusions: Prostanoids have favorable effect on rest-pain relief and ulcer healing in critical limb ischemia, without statistically significant difference between the two available drugs. The Cochrane study (CD006544) reported mistaken results due to defaults in the analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources