ArticleThrombosis journal2023
Assessing outcomes after thrombectomy with or without iliac vein stenting for young provoked DVT patients with iliac vein stenosis.
Article in Thrombosis journal, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to assess the outcomes of thrombectomy with/without iliac vein stenting for young and transiently provoked DVT patients with iliac vein stenosis.
methodsThis is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected multicenter database. Acute, transiently provoked DVT patients between 18 and 45 years old with iliac vein stenosis were included. All patients underwent thrombectomy. Outcomes including the Villalta score, the VEINES-QOL score, and adverse events were evaluated.
resultsThe data of 522 patients were collected of whom 75 were included, 58 underwent thrombectomy alone (nonstenting group) and 17 underwent thrombectomy and stenting (stenting group). Within 6 months, the Villalta score of patients in stenting group is lower than that of patients in nonstenting group (6 mo: 0.73 ± 0.77 vs. 1.41 ± 0.56, p = .0004), and the VEINES-QOL score of stenting group is higher than that of nonstenting group (6 mo: 89.00 ± 2.94 vs. 87.47 ± 3.72, p = .2141). At the following follow-ups, the Villalta score (12 mo: 0.56 ± 0.49 vs. 0.60 ± 0.58, p = .8266) and VEINES-QOL score (12 mo: 88.36 ± 2.29 vs. 88.31 ± 3.36, p = .9604) between the two groups are similar.
conclusionThe stenting group had better efficacy within 6 months after intervention, while there was no significant difference in the symptom, signs, and quality of life between two groups after 6 months within a 2-year follow-up.
trial registrationThis study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Registration Number: ChiCTR2200056073).
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.