ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2018
Outcome of thrombus aspiration in STEMI patients: a propensity score-adjusted study.
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- SARS-COV-2 colonizes coronary thrombus and impairs heart microcirculation bed in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects with acute myocardial infarction.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of thrombus aspiration (TA) prior to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) has undergone a radical change in intervention guidelines. The clinical implications, however, are still under scrutiny. This study investigated the clinical effects and outcome of TA before PPCI in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Overall 1027 patients with STEMI were analyzed in this retrospective, propensity score-adjusted, multicenter study. The primary endpoints were in-hospital and long-term mortality. There were 418 patients in the TA group and 609 in the conventional PPCI group. The in-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher in the TA group (8.7 vs. 5.0%; P = 0.03). During long-term follow-up [median follow-up duration 689 days (IQR 405-959)] the mortality rates were similar (TA 14.3%, conventional PPCI 15.0%; P = 0.85). Survival analysis for the complete observation period revealed no significant benefit of TA [hazard ratio (HR) 1.12; 97.5% CI 0.90-0.71; P = 0.63]. There were also no significant differences between the groups in the following secondary endpoints: composite of cardiovascular death and non-fatal reinfarction at discharge (P = 0.39), post-PPCI thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow-grade-3 (P = 0.14), left ventricular ejection fraction (P = 0.47), and non-fatal reinfarction during follow-up (P = 0.17). Rehospitalization rate (1.82 vs. 10.3%; P < 0.0001) and Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) grading (P = 0.02) during follow-up were significantly lower in the TA group. In our cohort the in-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher for TA patients, but during long-term follow-up the mortality rates did not differ. The incidence of rehospitalization and CCS grading were lower in the TA-treated patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29274046What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.