PDF factsheet
      Z

thrombectomy in acute myocardial infarction for all type of patients, clinical trials results

Angioguard versus conventional PCI
DIPLOMATE, 2004
Angioguard
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Wang, 2003
Angioguard
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction open
Follow-up duration: hospital stay
AngioJet versus conventional PCI
AiMI, 2006
AngioJet
versus
PCI alone
patients presenting within 12 h of symptom onsetopen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Florence, 2004
AngioJet
versus
placebo
patients with a first acute myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: 1 month
AnjioJet versus conventional PCI
JETSTENT, 2010
AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy
versus
direct stenting alone
patients with ST-elevation MI and at least moderate thrombus burden open
Follow-up duration: 6 months
Italy
Diver versus conventional PCI
De Luca, 2006
Diver
versus
conventional stenting
patients with anterior ST elevation myocardial infarctionopen
Follow-up duration: 6 months
PIHRATE, 2004
Diver
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: hospital stay
REMEDIA, 2005
Diver
versus
standard PCI
patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarctionopen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Sardella, 2005
Diver
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: 6 months
Export versus conventional PCI
Lipiecki, 2009
thrombus aspiration group with the Export catheter (n = 20) (Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, MN)
versus
EXPIRA, 2005
Export
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: 1, 9 months
Export (Chevalier), 2008
Export
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Noel, 2005
Export
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: hospital stay
TAPAS, 2008
ISRCTN16716833
Export
versus
conventional PCI
patients with myocardial infarctionopen
Follow-up duration: 1,12 months
Netherlands
FilterWire versus conventional PCI
PROMISE, 2005
FilterWire
versus
control
patients with myocardial infarction with and without ST-segment elevationopen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
UpFlow MI, 2007
FilterWire
versus
PCI using regular guidewires
patients with STEMI and coronary angiographic evidence of thrombotic occlusionopen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
FilterWireg versus conventional PCI
DEDICATION, 2008
FilterWireg
versus
PCI without distal protection
patients with STEMI referred within 12 h to have PCIopen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Guardwire versus conventional PCI
ASPARAGUS, 2008
Guardwire
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction open
Follow-up duration: hospital stay, 6 months
GuardWire versus conventional PCI
EMERALD, 2005
GuardWire
versus
angioplasty without distal protection
patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction presenting within 6 hours of symptom onset and undergoing primary PCI or rescue intervention after failed thrombolysisopen
Follow-up duration: 1, 6 months
MICADO, 2007
GuardWire
versus
PCI without distal protection
Patients with AMI within 24 hours from onsetopen
Follow-up duration: 1, 6 months
Guardwire versus conventional PCI
Nanasato, 2004
Guardwire
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction open
Follow-up duration: hospital stay
GuardWire versus conventional PCI
Ochala, 2007
GuardWire
versus
abciximab
patients with ST elevation acute myocardial infarction referred for primary percutaneous coronary interventionopen
Follow-up duration: 6 months
Tahk, 2008
GuardWire
versus
primary angioplasty without distal protection
AMI patients presenting within 12 h of onset of symptomsopen
Follow-up duration: 1, 6 months
Pronto versus conventional PCI
DEAR-MI, 2006
NCT00257153
Pronto
versus
primary percutaneous coronary intervention
patients with STEMI, admitted within 12 h of symptom onsetopen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Rescue versus conventional PCI
Dudek, 2004
Rescue (followed by stent implantation)
versus
PCI with stent implantation alone
patient with acute myocardial infarction with ST segment elevationopen
Follow-up duration: hospital stay
Kaltoft, 2006
Rescue
versus
standard PCI
patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction lasting <12 hours undergoing primary PCIopen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
NONSTOP, 2004
Rescue
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: Hospital
SpideRX versus conventional PCI
PREMIAR, 2007
SpideRX
versus
PCI without embolic protection
with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction at high risk of embolic events (including only baseline Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction grade 0 to 2 flow)open
Follow-up duration: 1, 6 months
thrombectomy versus conventional PCI
Ciszewski, 2011
aspiration thrombectomy
versus
high risk patients with STEMI and angiographic evidence of thrombus
Liistro, 2009
thrombus-aspiration PCI
versus
patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
INFUSE AMI, 2013
manual thrombus aspiration
versus
patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction caused by proximal or mid left anterior descending artery occlusion undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention with bivalirudin anticoagulation
Chao, 2008
initial thrombosuction
versus
STEMI patients within 12 h from onset
TROPHI,
thrombectomy
versus
thrombectomy versus PCI only
TASTE (Fröbert), 2013
NCT01093404
manual thrombus aspiration followed by PCI
versus
patients with STEMI undergoing PCI
TOTAL, 2015
NCT01149044
routine upfront manual thrombectomy
versus
PCI alone
patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary PCI
TVAC versus conventional PCI
VAMPIRE, 2004
TVAC
versus
conventional PCI
patients with acute myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: 8 months
X-sizer versus conventional PCI
Beran, 2002
X-sizer
versus
conventional PCI
patients with ACS and suspected intracoronary thrombusopen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Napodano, 2003
X-sizer
versus
conventional strategy of stenting
patients with AMI and angiographic evidence of intraluminal thrombusopen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
X AMINE ST, 2005
X-sizer
versus
standard PCI
patients with AMI <12 h and initial TIMI flow grade 0 to 1 and who were treated by PCIopen
Follow-up duration: 1, 6 months

  Options


in first

in second

  Filter