Presentation approaches for enhancing interpretability of patient-reported outcomes in meta-analyses: a systematic survey of Cochrane reviews.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically survey Cochrane reviews' approaches to calculating, presenting, and interpreting pooled estimates of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We retrospectively selected 200 Cochrane reviews that met the eligibility criteria. Two researchers independently extracted the pooled effect measures and approaches for pooling and interpreting the effect measures, reaching consensus through discussions. RESULTS: When primary studies used the same PROM, Cochrane review authors most often used mean differences (MDs) (81.9%) for calculating the pooled effect measures; when primary studies used different PROMs, the review authors often applied standardized mean differences (SMDs) (54.3%). Although in most cases (80.1%) the review authors interpreted the importance of effect, they failed, in 48.5% of the pooled effect measures, to report criteria for categorizing the magnitude of effect. When authors interpreted the importance of the effect, for those with primary studies using the same PROM, they most often referred to the minimally important differences (MIDs) (75.0%); for those with primary studies using different PROMs, the approaches used varied. CONCLUSION: Cochrane review authors most often used MDs or SMDs for calculating and presenting the pooled effect measures of PROs but often failed to make explicit their criteria for categorizing the magnitude of effect.

Venoplasty and stenting in post-thrombotic syndrome and non-thrombotic iliac vein lesion.

Introduction: Venous outflow obstruction is a common condition among patients with chronic venous insufficiency. Endovascular treatment is favourable over open surgery. This study aimed to assess stent patency and clinical outcome in venous outflow obstruction of lower limbs, and also to compare it between post-thrombotic syndrome and non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions.Material and methods: The study was a historical cohort study. Patients with chronic deep venous insufficiency referred to our tertiary referral centre who underwent venoplasty were recruited. Patients were divided into two groups: non-thrombotic-iliac-vein-lesions and post-thrombotic syndrome. Stent patency rate, clinical improvement and risk factors were evaluated during a six-months course after venoplasty.Results: One-hundred-sixty-four patients were included. Six-months primary, assisted primary and secondary patency rates were 98.86%, 100% and100% in the non-thrombotic-iliac-vein-lesions group and 88%, 93% and 96% in the post thrombotic syndrome groups (p-value = .005, p-value = .02, and p-value = .09, respectively). Pain, claudication and edema were the most common symptoms in both groups and significantly improved after six months. Early thrombosis in the PTS group was more common (9 vs. 1, P value = .007).Conclusion: Percutaneous stenting in patients with venous outflow obstruction is safe and effective with a high patency rate and significant decrease in clinical score in both post-thrombotic syndrome and non-thrombotic-iliac-vein lesions groups.