↓ Skip to main content

Pentoxifylline for intermittent claudication

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pentoxifylline for intermittent claudication
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005262.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kareem Salhiyyah, Rachel Forster, Eshan Senanayake, Mohammed Abdel-Hadi, Andrew Booth, Jonathan A Michaels

Abstract

Intermittent claudication (IC) is a symptom of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Pentoxifylline, one of many drugs used to treat IC, acts by decreasing blood viscosity, improving erythrocyte flexibility and promoting microcirculatory flow and tissue oxygen concentration. Many studies have evaluated the efficacy of pentoxifylline in treating individuals with PAD, but results of these studies are variable. This is an update of a review first published in 2012. To determine the efficacy of pentoxifylline in improving the walking capacity (i.e. pain-free walking distance and total (absolute, maximum) walking distance) of individuals with stable intermittent claudication, Fontaine stage II. For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched April 2015) and the Cochrane Register of Studies (2015, Issue 3). All double-blind, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pentoxifylline versus placebo or any other pharmacological intervention in patients with IC Fontaine stage II. Two review authors separately assessed included studies,. matched data and resolved disagreements by discussion. Review authors assessed the methodological quality of studies by using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and collected results related to pain-free walking distance (PFWD) and total walking distance (TWD). Comparison of studies was based on duration and dose of pentoxifylline. We included in this review 24 studies with 3377 participants. Seventeen studies compared pentoxifylline versus placebo. In the seven remaining studies, pentoxifylline was compared with flunarizine (one study), aspirin (one study), Gingko biloba extract (one study), nylidrin hydrochloride (one study), prostaglandin E1 (two studies) and buflomedil and nifedipine (one study). The quality of the evidence was generally low, with large variability in reported findings.. Most included studies did not report on random sequence generation and allocation concealment, did not provide adequate information to allow selective reporting to be judged and did not report blinding of assessors. Heterogeneity between included studies was considerable with regards to multiple variables, including duration of treatment, dose of pentoxifylline, baseline walking distance and participant characteristics; therefore, pooled analysis was not possible.Of 17 studies comparing pentoxifylline with placebo, 14 reported TWD and 11 reported PFWD; the difference in percentage improvement in TWD for pentoxifylline over placebo ranged from 1.2% to 155.9%, and in PFWD from -33.8% to 73.9%. Testing the statistical significance of these results generally was not possible because data were insufficient. Most included studies suggested improvement in PFWD and TWD for pentoxifylline over placebo and other treatments, but the statistical and clinical significance of findings from individual trials is unclear. Pentoxifylline generally was well tolerated; the most commonly reported side effects consisted of gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea. Given the generally poor quality of published studies and the large degree of heterogeneity evident in interventions and in results, the overall benefit of pentoxifylline for patients with Fontaine class II intermittent claudication remains uncertain. Pentoxifylline was shown to be generally well tolerated.Based on total available evidence, high-quality data are currently insufficient to reveal the benefits of pentoxifylline for intermittent claudication.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 87 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 20 23%
Student > Master 18 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 11%
Other 17 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 35%
Unspecified 25 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 14 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 May 2019.
All research outputs
#1,300,144
of 13,401,642 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,784
of 10,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,385
of 248,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#137
of 265 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,401,642 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,583 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 248,862 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 265 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.