Table 18:
Technical Success With Mechanical Thrombectomy Use in Acute and Subacute DVT in Observational Studies
| Results | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author, year | Outcome measurement | MT | Comparator | P value |
| PMT (AngioJet) | ||||
| Garcia et al, 201585 | Grade III (complete lysis) | 57.7% (n = 165) | 64.2% (n = 27) | P = .42 |
| Huang et al 201596 | Grade III (complete lysis) | 0 | 0 | NS |
| Thrombus score at 12 moa | 0.56 (SD ± 0.93) | 2.22 (SD ± 3.49) | P = .224 | |
| Huang et al, 202197 | Technical success at 5 y | 38.3% (n = 23) | 25.4% (n = 15) | P = .169 |
| Grade III | 45% (n = 27) | 28.8% (n = 17) | P = .07 | |
| Kuo et al, 201798 | Functional venous obstruction | 30% (n = 9) | 28.7% (n = 12) | P = .474 |
| Mean thrombus score at 24 mo | 0.70 (SD ± 1.3) | 0.90 (SD ± 1.3) | P = .526 | |
| Lee et al, 202099 | Grade III | 95% (n = 19) | 95% (n = 19) | P = 1.0 |
| Li et al, 2020100 | Technical success rate | 100% | 100% | P = 1.0 |
| Grade III | 75.4% (n = 46) | 69.2% (n = 45) | P = .44 | |
| Liu et al, 2018101 | Grade III or higher | 53.8% (n = 28) | 63.3% (n = 38) | P = .32 |
| Pouncey et al, 2020103 | Proportion of patients who achieved lytic success | 79% (n = 55) | 83% (n = 67) | P = .30 |
| Tian et al, 2021105 | Lysis efficacy rate | 100% (n = 48) | 96% (n = 48) | P = .162 |
| Grade III | 84.5% (n = 42) | 76% (n = 36) | P = .057 | |
| Xu et al, 2021107 | Technical success | 100% | 100% | NR |
| Grade III (100%) | 23.1% (n = 43) | 17.6% (n = 32) | P = .01 | |
| Xu et al, 2020108 | Technical success | 100% | 100% | NR |
| Grade III | 36.7% (n = 11) | 15.9% (n = 7) | P = .04 | |
| Zhu et al, 2020109 | Complete removal of thrombi | 72% (n = 23) | 82% (n = 27) | P = .34 |
| Vacuum Aspiration (Indigo) | ||||
| No studies met our inclusion criteria for this mechanical thrombectomy device | ||||
| Rotational (Rotarex or Cleaner) | ||||
| We did not identify any studies that reported on this outcome of interest | ||||
| Ultrasound Assisted (EKOS) | ||||
| Baker et al, 201294 | Percentage thrombus resolution | 82% (IQR 55-92) | 89% (IQR 70-100) | P = .560 |
| Grade III (complete lysis) | 21.9% (n = 14) | 36.8% (n = 7) | P = .17 | |
| Lu et al, 201775 | Grade III (100%) | 59.5% (n = 25) | 20% (n = 5) | P = .002 |
| Proportion with clot burden reduced by > 50% | 92% (n = 218) | 56% (n = 14) | NRb | |
| Tichelaar et al, 2016106 | Grade III (> 90%) | 76% (n = 25) | 88% (n = 54) | P = .15 |
Abbreviations: DVT, deep vein thrombosis; IQR, interquartile range; MT, mechanical thrombectomy; NR, not reported; NS, not significant; PMT, pharmacomechanical thrombectomy; SD, standard deviation.
a
Both groups statistically significantly improved from baseline.
b
Both groups had statistically significant reductions in clot burden compared to baseline.