Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32274106›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2020

Variable predictors of acute pulmonary embolism recurrence with duration of follow-up.

Yi-Lan Yang, Ping Yuan, Chuan-Yu Wang, Bigyan Pudasaini, Yuan Li, Yan-Zhe Yu, Qin-Hua Zhao, Lan Wang, Su-Gang Gong, Rong Jiang and 8 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. 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

18 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yi-Lan YangDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Ping YuanDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Chuan-Yu WangDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Bigyan PudasainiDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Yuan LiDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Yan-Zhe YuDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Nanjing 210000, China.
Qin-Hua ZhaoDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Lan WangDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Su-Gang GongDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Rong JiangDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Wen-Hui WuDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Jing HeDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Jian GuoDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Ci-Jun LuoDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Hong-Ling QiuDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Chang ChenDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Jin-Ling LiDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Jin-Ming LiuDepartment of Cardio-Pulmonary Circulation, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200433, China.
Tongji University · CNShanghai Pulmonary Hospital · CNNanjing Drum Tower Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a critical disease and often leads to a high mortality and morbidity. Several studies have identified predictors of PE recurrence, but whether these predictors have prognostic value and how they vary during varied follow-up periods remain unclear.

methodsWe retrospectively assessed the occurrence of recurrent PE and the survival time of patients with a diagnosis of acute PE at Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital from May 2007 to May 2018. Potential predictors of recurrent PE were evaluated at different points (1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 60 and 120-month) during a long-term follow-up for each patient. Patients were stratified into two groups by gender to analyze the impact of sex in period-guided prognostic prediction. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, survival analysis and multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis were implemented as statistical analysis methods.

resultsIn total, 597 acute PE patients were included, of whom 62 reported a PE recurrence. Male patients tend to have a lower risk of PE recurrence than female patients during 3- to 60-month follow-up period but have a higher risk of PE recurrence than female patients during 120-month follow-up period. The independent predictors of recurrence-free survival varied among different follow-up periods: In all patients, diabetes was an independent predictor only within 30 days follow-up period and female was considered as an independent predictor during 3- to 120-month follow-up period. Among male patients, hyperlipidemia and Log D-dimer (cut-off value =3.436) was observed as a predictor of recurrent PE within 6-month and over 12-month follow-up respectively. However, there is no unified independent prognostic indicator for female patients identified.

conclusionsIn the early stage of follow-up, male PE patients have better prognosis, but with the extension of follow-up, female PE patients have better prognosis. The independent predictors of recurrence-free survival vary in different follow-up periods in PE patients when stratified based on gender and associated medical conditions.

Indexed as

prognostic valuePulmonary embolism (PE)recurrent predictors

Identifiers

PMID32274106
PMCPMC7139025
OpenAlexW3009581544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.