ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2015
Fibrinolysis for Acute Care of Pulmonary Embolism in the Intermediate Risk Patient.
Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid on-site evaluation of routine biochemical parameters to predict right ventricular dysfunction in and the prognosis of patients with acute pulmonary embolism upon admission to the emergency room.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2018Article
- Refractory Hypoxemia in a Patient with Submassive Pulmonary Embolism and an Intracardiac Shunt: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.The Permanente journal · 2018Review
- Statins as a preventative therapy for venous thromboembolism.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2017Review
- Estimation of right ventricular dysfunction by computed tomography pulmonary angiography: a valuable adjunct for evaluating the severity of acute pulmonary embolism.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Controversy over the role of fibrinolysis in patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) has persisted because of the lack of adequately sized trials. The PEITHO study now allows a more precise estimate of the risk to benefit ratio of fibrinolysis in these patients. This trial enrolled patients with intermediate-risk PE who were randomized to receive heparin with either tenecteplase or placebo. Fibrinolysis was associated with a significant reduction in the combined end-point of death or hemodynamic decompensation, but also with a significant increase in the risk of major bleeding. The primary efficacy end-point occurred in 2.6 % of the patients in the tenecteplase group and in 5.6 % of the patients in the placebo group (OR, 0.44; 95 % CI, 0.23 to 0.87), conversely, major extracranial bleeding occurred in 6.3 % and 1.2 % in the tenecteplase and placebo groups, respectively (OR, 5.55; 95 % CI, 2.3 to 13.39) and stroke occurred in 2.4 % and in 0.2 % of the patients in the tenecteplase group and in the placebo group, respectively (OR, 12.10; 95 % CI, 1.57 to 93.39). No difference was observed for the risk of death alone and the risk of full-dose thrombolytic therapy outweighs its benefit in patients with intermediate-risk PE. Recent meta-analyses suggest that fibrinolysis may be associated with a slight reduction in overall mortality offset by an increase in major bleeding. Two pilot studies suggest that a reduced dose of fibrinolysis may produce significant hemodynamic improvement with a low risk of major bleeding. These options need to be evaluated in larger studies including patients with a higher risk of adverse outcome than those included in the PEITHO study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.