ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024
The Use of Thrombectomy during Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Resurrecting an Old Concept in Contemporary Practice.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reperfusion injury from a haemodynamic standpoint and role of pressure-controlled reperfusion in avoiding reperfusion injury.European heart journal open · 2026Review
- Successful Thromboaspiration in STEMI Due to Extensive Coronary Thrombosis of Unclear Cause.JACC. Case reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Sustained mechanical aspiration thrombectomy for acute coronary syndrome with large thrombus burden: The Aspiration, Vasodilators, Imaging, and Stenting (AVIS) protocol.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025Article
- Sex-based Differences in Complications Following Percutaneous Coronary Interventions.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Review
- Localization of Hemostasis Elements in Aspirated Coronary Thrombi at Different Stages of Evolution.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optimal myocardial reperfusion during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) is increasingly recognized to be beyond restoring epicardial coronary flow. Both invasive and non-invasive tools have highlighted the limitation of using this metric, and more efforts are focused towards achieving optimal reperfusion at the level of the microcirculation. Recent data highlighted the close relationship between thrombus burden and impaired microcirculation in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Moreover, distal embolization was an independent predictor of mortality in patients with STEMI. Likewise, the development of no-reflow phenomenon has been directly linked with worse clinical outcomes. Adjunctive thrombus aspiration during pPCI is intuitively intended to remove atherothrombotic material to mitigate the risk of distal embolization and the no-reflow phenomenon (NRP). However, prior trials on the use of thrombectomy during pPCI did not support its routine use, with comparable clinical endpoints to patients who underwent PCI alone. This article aims to review the existing literature highlighting the limitation on the use of thrombectomy and provide future insights into trials investigating the role of thrombectomy in contemporary pPCI.
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.