Skip to main content

Table 4 GRADE evidence profile: Aspiration thrombectomy (AT) prior to PCI in patients with STEMI

From: Aspiration thrombectomy prior to percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Quality assessment

Summary of findings

Certainty in estimates

      

Study event rates

Relative risk (95 % CI)

Anticipated absolute effects over6 months

OR Quality of evidence

No of participants(studies) Range follow-up time

Risk of bias

Inconsistency

Indirectness

Imprecision

Publication bias

Without AT

With AT

Without AT

With AT

Overall mortality (Includes cardiovascular (CV) mortality for studies only reporting CV mortality)

20866 (20) 6–12 mo

No serious limitations1

No serious limitations

No serious limitations2

Serious imprecision1,3

Undetected

457/ 10433

403/ 10433

0.89 (0.78-1.01)

35 per 10004

4 fewer per 1000 (8 fewer to 0 more)

⊕⊕⊕⊕O MODERATE, due to imprecision

Recurrent myocardial infarction

20662 (17) 6–12 mo

No serious limitations 1

No serious limitations

No serious limitations

Serious imprecision1,5

Undetected

246/ 10331 (2.3 %)

229/10331(2.2 %)

0.94 (0.79-1.12)

18 per 10004

1 fewer per 1000 (4 fewer to 2 more)

⊕⊕⊕⊕O MODERATE, due to imprecision

Stroke

18348 (8) 6–12 mo

No serious limitations 1

No serious limitations

No serious limitations

Serious imprecision1,6

Undetected

48/ 9163 (0.5 %)

77/9185 (0.8 %)

1.56 (1.09-2.24)

5 per 10004

3 more per 1000 (0 more to 6 more)

⊕⊕⊕⊕O MODERATE, due to imprecision

Major bleeding

11655 (4) 6–12 mo

No serious limitations 1

No serious limitations

No serious limitations

Serious imprecision1,5

Undetected

99/5823 (1.7 %)

101/5832 (1.7 %)

1.02 (0.78-1.35)

15 per 10004

0 more per 1000 (3 fewer to 5 more)

⊕⊕⊕⊕O MODERATE, due to imprecision

  1. 1No studies were blinded to patient or caregiver. Some studies (minority of subjects enrolled) did not indicate blinded adjudication. While not specifically rating down for risk of bias, these additional concerns plus borderline clinically important imprecision led to downgrading of certainty in estimates for all outcomes
  2. 2Some studies only report cardiovascular and not all cause mortality. However cardiovascular mortality constituted significant proportion of overall mortality in studies reporting both types of mortality. Therefore we opted against rating down for indirectness
  3. 395% CI for absolute effects include clinically important benefit and no benefit
  4. 4Baseline risk estimates for mortality, recurrent MI, stroke, and major bleeds come from control arm of TOTAL study (largest and most recent randomized trial)
  5. 595% CI for absolute effects include benefit and harm
  6. 695% CI for absolute effects include clinically important harm and no harm