Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A randomized comparison of manual versus mechanical thrombus removal in primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (TREAT-MI).

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and long-term clinical outcome of manual thrombus aspiration with the Export catheter (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) versus mechanical thrombus cutting/aspiration with the X-sizer system (eV3, White Bear Lake, MN) in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI).

BACKGROUND: In PPCI for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), markers of myocardial reperfusion are improved with adjunctive thrombectomy. Previous studies of different devices showed a variability in performance, suitability, and short-term clinical outcome. In current literature, no direct comparison is available.

METHODS: We prospectively randomized 201 patients admitted for PPCI for STEMI to either the Export catheter or the X-sizer prior to stent deployment. Technical success in advancing to and across the lesion, improvement of flow, reduction of thrombus, and the effect on ST-segment resolution were examined. The primary endpoint of the follow-up study was the combined endpoint of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), or target-vessel revascularization (TVR) at 3 years.

RESULTS: Although the Export catheter was more successfully deployed, other procedural parameters were similar with a trend toward better ST-segment resolution (56.6% vs. 44%; P = 0.06) as compared to the X-sizer system. The occurrence of the primary clinical endpoint at 3 years was 22.2% and 18.6%, respectively (HR 1.20; 95% CI 0.65-2.22; P = 0.35).

CONCLUSION: Despite shorter procedural times, better lesion crossing, and fewer complications, both surrogate endpoints as well as 3-year clinical follow-up were similar with the use of the Export catheter as compared to the X-sizer system.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app