Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27236708›Full record

ReviewDer Radiologe2016

[Diagnostics of acute pulmonary embolism : An update].

M Das, J E Wildberger

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Radiologe, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M DasDepartment of Radiology, Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, The Netherlands. m.das@mumc.nl.
J E WildbergerDepartment of Radiology, Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pulmonary embolism is an acute and potentially life-threatening condition requiring a differentiated diagnostic algorithm. Assessment of the risk and clinical probability are of utmost importance in order to initiate early treatment or to reliably exclude a pulmonary embolism. Computed tomography of the pulmonary arteries (CTPA) has become the non-invasive gold standard for the diagnostic approach. Alternatively, scintigraphy can also be used. A negative CTPA excludes a pulmonary embolism with a high degree of probability. Furthermore, CTPA can supply additional information, such as estimation of the right ventricular strain (right ventricular dysfunction, RVD) or alternative diagnoses if pulmonary embolism has been ruled out as the primary cause of symptoms. An essential prerequisite is a high quality CTPA with sufficient contrast enhancement in the pulmonary arteries, avoidance of artifacts and optimization of both the radiation dosage as well as the amount of contrast medium, individually determined for each patient.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseAngiographyDiagnosis, DifferentialEvidence-Based MedicineHumansImage EnhancementPulmonary ArteryPulmonary EmbolismTomography, X-Ray ComputedVentricular Dysfunction, RightComputed tomographyPerfusion scintigraphyPregnancyPulmonary embolismRight ventricular dysfunction

Identifiers

PMID27236708
OpenAlexW2395964904

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.