Pratik A. Shukla

Dr. Pratik A. Shukla


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
11 March 2021 in CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SSSrinidhi Shanmugasundaram
Srinidhi Shanmugasundaram
SNShree Nadkarni
Shree Nadkarni
AKAbhishek Kumar
Abhishek Kumar
PSPratik A. Shukla
Pratik A. Shukla

1 November 2020 in Academic Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ASAntony Sare
Antony Sare
APAesha Patel
Aesha Patel
PKPankti Kothari
Pankti Kothari
AKAbhishek Kumar
Abhishek Kumar
NPNitin Patel
Nitin Patel
PSPratik A. Shukla
Pratik A. Shukla

18 October 2016 in Current Otorhinolaryngology Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SKSuat Kilic
Suat Kilic
PSPratik A. Shukla
Pratik A. Shukla
EMEmily J. Marchiano
Emily J. Marchiano
RPRonak H. Patel
Ronak H. Patel
SBSoly Baredes
Soly Baredes
JEJean Anderson Eloy
Jean Anderson Eloy

26 April 2022 in Journal of the American College of Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
BGBishoy Gad
Bishoy Gad
SSSrinidhi Shanmugasundaram
Srinidhi Shanmugasundaram
AKAbhishek Kumar
Abhishek Kumar
PSPratik A. Shukla
Pratik A. Shukla

1 May 2023 in Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
NKNikhit Kethidi
Nikhit Kethidi
KBKyrollos Barsoum
Kyrollos Barsoum
PSPratik A. Shukla
Pratik A. Shukla
AKAbhishek Kumar
Abhishek Kumar
This study aimed to assess the safety of complex inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval techniques through a systematic review of published literature. Using PubMed, a systematic review was conducted in line with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines to identify articles published through April 2020 that reported on complex IVC filter retrieval techniques in >5 patients. Case reports, review papers, and studies that did not report on primary outcomes or variables of interest were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment scale. Pooled success and complication rates were calculated for the overall number of complex retrieval attempts as well as for each filter type and each complex retrieval method. Sixteen fair-quality and three good-quality studies met the inclusion criteria, with 758 patients (428 female) who had undergone 770 advanced retrieval attempts. The mean age of the patients was 46.5 ± 7.1 years (range: 14.1-90), and the mean dwell time was 602.5 ± 388.6 days (range: 5-7336). Regarding filters, 92.6% (702/758) were retrievable and 7.4% (56/758) were permanent. Indications for complex retrieval included the failure of standard retrieval (89.2%; 676/758) and tilting or embedding in the caval wall (53.8%; 408/758); 92.6% (713/770) of the advanced retrieval attempts were successful. The pooled success rate was 92.0% (602/654) for retrievable filters and 96.4% (53/55) for permanent filters (P = 0.422). Only 2.8% (21/758) of patients experienced major complications, and the major complication rate was not significantly associated with filter type (P = 0.183). Advanced techniques for IVC filter retrieval appear safe for the retrieval of retrievable filters and certain permanent filters, with a low short-term major complication rate. Further studies on complex retrieval techniques used to remove permanent filters should be conducted to clarify their safety with respect to filter type.

19 October 2022 in Academic Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SSSrinidhi Shanmugasundaram
Srinidhi Shanmugasundaram
BHBunchhin Huy
Bunchhin Huy
DSDhvani Shihora
Dhvani Shihora
NLNicole Lamparello
Nicole Lamparello
AKAbhishek Kumar
Abhishek Kumar
PSPratik A. Shukla
Pratik A. Shukla