ArticleVascular specialist international2020
Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes between Angiojet Pharmacomechanical Thrombectomy and Hybrid Surgical Thrombectomy for Thrombotic Occlusion of Hemodialysis Access.
Article in Vascular specialist international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Thrombectomy approach for access maintenance in the end stage renal disease population: a narrative review.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2023Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis retrospective study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between hybrid surgical thrombectomy (ST) and AngioJet pharmacomechanical thrombectomy (PMT) for thrombotic occlusion of arteriovenous graft. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study enrolled patients who underwent either hybrid ST or AngioJet PMT in Presbyterian Medical Center from July 2018 to December 2018. We primarily compared the technical and clinical success rates between the two groups immediately after the procedures. Subsequently, the postprocedure clinical outcomes, including the primary and secondary patency rates and complications, were also compared.
resultsThe hybrid ST group had a significantly higher bleeding amount than the AngioJet PMT group (P=0.02). The technical and clinical success rates were 96.7% and 93.3% in the AngioJet PMT group and 100% and 100% in the hybrid ST group, respectively. There was no significant difference in complications between the groups. The primary and secondary patencies at 12 months were not statistically different between the groups.
conclusionComparable clinical outcomes were observed between the AngioJet PMT and hybrid ST groups, highlighting an equivalent efficacy of these two methods. Although the cost is more expensive, AngioJet PMT lowered the bleeding amount. Therefore, it can be considered in selected patients who are at risk of bleeding or reluctant to surgery.
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.