ArticleDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2020
Side-hole catheters have higher thrombus aspiration efficiency than regular end-hole catheters in an in vitro model.
Article in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2020. 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.
- A randomized controlled trial of catheters with different tips and lengths for patients requiring continuous renal replacement therapy in intensive care unit.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to evaluate and compare thrombus aspiration efficiency between side-hole and end-hole thrombus-aspirating catheters.
methodsUsing an in vitro model of acute thrombus occlusion, we performed thrombus aspiration with two catheter designs. Two end-hole and two side-hole catheters, 8 F and 10 F in diameter, were examined. Thrombus aspiration was performed with each catheter 30 times, and the amount of thrombotic material aspirated in each attempt was determined. The mean weight of the thrombotic material and the mean weight of the non-fluid thrombotic material extracted in all 30 attempts by each catheter were also determined.
resultsThe 10 F side-hole catheter aspirated more thrombotic material than did the 10 F end-hole catheter (44.76 g vs. 28.35 g). The 8 F side-hole catheter had higher thrombus aspiration capacity than did the 8 F end-hole catheter in terms of the mean weight of the aspirated thrombus at each aspiration attempt (1.41 g vs. 0.58 g; P < 0.001) and the mean volume of the aspirated thrombotic material at each aspiration attempt (1.79 mL vs. 1.01 mL; P < 0.001). The mean weight of the non-fluid thrombotic material aspirated with the side-hole catheters was higher than that aspirated by the end-hole catheters with the same diameter size (31.06 g vs. 22.41 g for the 10 F catheters; P < 0.001; and 4.54 g vs. 2.99 g for the 8 F catheters; P < 0.001).
conclusionSide-hole catheters are more effective in aspirating acute thrombi. The added benefit of the side-hole design is more remarkable in smaller-sized catheters. Animal models are needed to examine their aspiration capacity in a real elastic vascular conduit and in the presence of wall-adherent thrombi.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.