ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2024
Outcomes From Mechanical Thrombectomy for Deep Vein Thrombosis: Insights From the PINC AI Healthcare Database.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07708376 (Prospective, Multicenter, Registry of the FLOWRUNNER Aspiration System for Safety and Effectiveness in the Removal of Symptomatic Venous Thrombosis), which is not on this 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.
Prospective, Multicenter, Registry of the FLOWRUNNER Aspiration System for Safety and Effectiveness in the Removal of Symptomatic Venous Thrombosis (FAST)
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mechanical embolectomy of a large iliocaval fat embolus.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is playing an increasingly important role in treating deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Although degrees of safety and efficacy have been shown in independent studies, there remains a lack of comparative evidence between MT devices. To address this, we aimed to compare demographics, clinical outcomes, and resource metrics of patients receiving MT for DVT with 3 common devices using a real-world database. Methods: Patients receiving MT for DVT between January 2018 and March 2022 were identified from the PINC AI Healthcare Database and divided into analysis populations for the AngioJet ZelanteDVT (AJ), the ClotTriever system (CT), and the Indigo system (IN). Rates of in-hospital mortality, resource utilization, and 30-day readmission were compared. Regression modeling was performed to adjust for potential covariates and compare outcomes. Results: A total of 4455 MT encounters were identified and met inclusion criteria (AJ, 1753; CT, 1344; IN, 1358). In-hospital mortality ranged from 1.0% (CT) to 2.9% (IN), with modeling predicting significantly higher odds for the AJ (odds ratio [OR], 3.42) and IN (OR, 3.38) groups. Similarly, higher rates of resource utilization were predicted in the AJ and IN groups when compared with the reference group (CT). Average costs ranged from $29,549 (CT: SD, $30,705) to $42,705 (IN: SD, $41,114). Thirty-day readmissions ranged from 10.0% (AJ) to 14.6% (IN), while modeling predicted significantly greater odds for the IN group (OR, 1.47). Conclusions: These results suggest that all MT interventions may be unequal in terms of outcomes and resources, with the CT device associated with lower in-hospital mortality and resource burden.
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.