Results from a meta-analysis comparing bovine carotid artery grafts with polytetrafluoroethylene grafts must be interpreted with caution due to methodological flaws

Ref ID 828
First Author J.J. Ng
Journal JOURNAL OF VASCULAR ACCESS
Year Of Publishing 2021
URL https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1129729820946196?casa_token=9Fb9cm3qm9AAAAAA:EDGmGWwCM5JJkRnwZ0XjghvjdrP8Ek0tjkbesE9B8f_GP3l9enIc4vtgqCYnGrqN2cvHFHNMVgTsoQ
Keywords Surgery
Observational studies
Statistical
Power
Heterogeneity
Problem(s) Inclusion of observational / non-randomised studies
Inadequate analysis of heterogeneity
Lack of statistical expertise in handling of quantitative data
Number of systematic reviews included 1
Summary of Findings The letter to the editor highlights concerns with the conduct of a systematic review and meta-analysis published in 2020 of complication rates and patency outcomes of bovine carotid artery grafts with polytetrafluoroethylene grafts for haemodialysis vascular access including the meta-analysis of one RCT with 3 observational studies resulting in considerable methodological, clinical and statistical heterogeneity.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?