The Rise and Fall of Aspiration Thrombectomy

Aspiration thrombectomy in ST-Elevation myocardial infarction: Further insights from a network meta-analysis of randomized trials

Background

The initial enthusiasm for thrombectomy during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients has given way to restraint. There has been some limited interest whether it is beneficial in a few selected subgroups. Hence, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare conventional PCI (cPCI), Aspiration or manual thrombectomy (AT) and Mechanical thrombectomy (McT) for clarification.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched for randomized studies that compared AT, McT, or cPCI. A network meta-analysis was performed and odd’s ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals was generated for major adverse cardiac events (MACE), mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR), stent thrombosis (ST), stroke, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), myocardial blush grade (MBG) and ST segment resolution (STR).

Results

A total of 43 randomized trials (n = 26,682) were included. The risk of MACE (OR 0.86 95% CI 0.73–1.00), Mortality (OR 0.85 95% CI 0.73–0.99), MI (OR 0.65, 95% CI: 0.44–0.95) and TVR (OR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.74–1.00) were lower with AT compared to cPCI. The risk of ST and stroke was no different with the use of adjunctive AT. MBG, STR, and LVEF improved with the use of AT while the infarct size was no different in the two groups.

Conclusions

Our comprehensive network meta-analysis suggests conflicting outcomes with AT. While Mortality, MACE, MI seem better, there is a suggestion that, Stroke and ST might be worse. Whether AT can still be pursued in any select cases should be further scrutinized.

Long-term outcomes with aspiration thrombectomy for patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

Randomized clinical trials that examined long-term clinical outcomes of routine aspiration thrombectomy prior to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction have yielded different results. We hypothesized that the routine use of manual thrombus aspiration prior to primary PCI lacks long-term clinical benefits. Electronic databases were searched for randomized trials comparing routine aspiration thrombectomy and conventional PCI. We included only trials that reported clinical outcomes beyond 6 months. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events, re-infarction, cardiovascular mortality, and stent thrombosis (ST). A DerSimonian-Laird model was used to construct the summary estimates risk ratio (RR). We retrieved 18 trials with 20 641 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients, of whom 10 331 patients underwent routine aspiration thrombectomy prior to primary PCI. At a mean follow-up of 12 months, there was no significant decrease in the risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-1.05, P = 0.22), major adverse cardiac events (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.87-1.03, P = 0.18), re-infarction (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.80-1.13, P = 0.59), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.47-1.36, P = 0.40), or ST (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.63-1.01, P = 0.06) with routine aspiration thrombectomy. Routine aspiration thrombectomy prior to primary PCI was not associated with a reduction in long-term mortality or clinical outcomes. Future randomized trials are warranted to further evaluate the role of aspiration thrombectomy in select patients and coronary lesions.