ArticleInterventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences2025
Push and Fluff technique for optimization of clot integration with stent-retriever: An in vitro model.
Article in Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundFor stent-retriever (SR) thrombectomy, technical developments such as the Push and Fluff technique (PFT) appear to have a significant impact on procedural success. This study aimed to (1) quantify the enhancement in clot traction when using PFT as compared to the standard unsheathing technique (SUT) and (2) to evaluate the performance of PFT in new versus established users of the technique.MethodsOperators were divided between established PFT and SUT users. Each experiment was labeled according to the SR size, utilized technique, and operator experience. A three-dimensional-printed chamber with a clot simulant was used. After each retriever deployment, the SR wire was connected to a force gauge. Tension was applied by pulling the gauge until clot disengagement. The maximal force was recorded.ResultsA total of 167 experiments were performed. The median overall force to disengage the clot was 1.11 pounds for PFT and 0.70 pounds for SUT (an overall 59.1% increment with PFT; p < 0.001). The PFT effect was consistent across different retriever sizes (69% enhancement with the 3 × 32mm device, 52% with the 4 × 28mm, 65% with the 4 × 41mm, 47% with the 6 × 37mm). The ratio of tension required for clot disengagement with PFT versus SUT was comparable between physicians who were PFT versus SUT operators (1.595 [0.844] vs. 1.448 [1.021]; p: 0.424). The PFT/SUT traction ratio remained consistent from passes 1 to 4 of each technique in SUT users.ConclusionPFT led to reproduceable improvement in clot engagement with an average ∼60% increase in clot traction in this model and was found not to have a significant learning curve.
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.