4.2 Article

Percutaneous Mechanical Thrombectomy Using Rotarex® S Device in Acute Limb Ischemia in Infrainguinal Occlusions

期刊

BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 2017, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2017/2362769

关键词

-

资金

  1. Charles University supporting program [Q38/LF1]
  2. OP Prague Competitiveness [CZ.2.16/3.1.00/21565]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose. To evaluate the effectiveness of percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy using Rotarex S in the treatment of acute limb ischemia (ALI) in infrainguinal occlusions in a retrospective study of patients treated in our institution. Methods. In this study, we identified a total of 147 ALI patients that underwent mechanical thrombectomy using Rotarex S at our institution. In 82% of the cases, percutaneous thrombectomy was used as first-line treatment, and for the remainder of the cases, it was used as bailout after ineffective aspiration or thrombolysis. Additional fibrinolysis and adjunctive aspirational thrombectomy were utilized for outflow occlusion when required. Procedural outcomes, amputation rate, and mortality at 30 days were evaluated. Results. Of the 147 patients treated with mechanical thrombectomy, Rotarex S was used as first-line treatment in 120 cases and as second-line treatment in 27 cases. Overall, we achieved 90.5% procedural revascularization success rate when combining mechanical thrombectomy with limited thrombolysis for severe outflow obstruction, and 1 death and 3 amputations were observed. We achieved primary success in 68.7% of the patients with the mechanical thrombectomy only, and in 21.8% of the patients, we successfully used additional limited thrombolysis in the outflow. The overall mortality was 0.7% and amputation rate was 2% at 30 days. Conclusion. Percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy as first-line mini-invasive treatment in infrainguinal ALI is safe, quick, and effective, and the performance outcomes can be superior to that of traditional surgical embolectomy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据