ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2026
Comparison of the short-term and long-term effects of AngioJet and AcoStream mechanical catheter thrombolysis on acute iliofemoral vein thrombosis.
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2026. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the short-term and long-term clinical efficacy and safety of AngioJet and AcoStream thrombectomy devices in the treatment of acute iliofemoral venous thrombosis.
methodsWe conducted a 4-year retrospective case ‒ control study. A total of 243 patients with acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis underwent endovascular interventional therapy in our hospital. According to different operation methods, patients were divided into two groups: Group A (AngioJet mechanical thrombectomy system) and Group B (AcoStream mechanical thrombectomy system). The clinical basic data and short-term postoperative efficacy of the two groups were compared. After 36-months of follow-up, the recurrence rate and long-term efficacy of post-thrombotic syndrome were compared between the two groups. The Kaplan-Meier survival method was used to analyze the proportion of Post-Thrombotic Syndrome (PTS).
resultsThe thrombus aspiration time in the AngioJet group (4.62 ± 0.12 min) was shorter than that in the AcoStream group (5.87 ± 0.09 min) (p = 0.001); the intraoperative blood loss (264.12 ± 5.46 mL) was less than that in the AcoStream group (307.62 ± 4.52 mL) (p < 0.001); the hemoglobin difference (15.57 ± 0.72 g/L) was less than that in the AcoStream group (24.58 ± 0.86 g/L) (p < 0.001); the D - D decrease rate (0.85 ± 0.03 mg/L/D) was faster than that in the AcoStream group (0.75 ± 0.03 mg/L/D) (p = 0.03); the dosage of urokinase (147.39 ± 0.71) million units was more than that in the AcoStream group (125.33 ± 1.01) million. Units (p < 0.001). The swelling reduction rates of the thigh and calf at 24-hours after surgery were (0.61 ± 0.01%) vs. (0.56 ± 0.01%) and (0.63 ± 0.01%) vs. (0.66 ± 0.01%), respectively, with statistically significant differences between the two groups (p < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative hematuria in the AngioJet group (91.9%) was higher than that in the AcoStream group (0.0%) (p < 0.001). After 36-months of follow-up, the thrombus recurrence rate in the AngioJet group (8.9%) was compared with that in the AcoStream group (2.5%) (p < 0.05), and the incidence of postoperative PTS in the two groups was (34.95%) vs. (21.67%) (p = 0.016).
conclusionCompared with the AcoStream system, the AngioJet system has a higher efficiency of thrombus clearance, but the incidence of hematuria and the recurrence rate are slightly higher. Of course, both have their advantages and disadvantages, and the appropriate surgical method should be selected according to the individual conditions of patients.
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.