SynthesisBlood advances2020
Thrombolytics for venous thromboembolic events: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Blood advances, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of thrombolysis for pediatric venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Blood advances · 2025Pooled it
- Emerging strategies in venous thromboembolism: a narrative review of pharmacological innovations.Thrombosis journal · 2026Review
- Bioprinted Micro-Clots for Kinetic Analysis of Endothelial Cell-Mediated Fibrinolysis.Advanced healthcare materials · 2025Article
- Sonothrombolysis Using Microfluidically Produced Microbubbles in a Murine Model of Deep Vein Thrombosis.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Mechanical thrombectomy for the management of iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis in the second trimester of pregnancy secondary to May-Thurner syndrome.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2024Article
- Targeting Fibrinolytic Inhibition for Venous Thromboembolism Treatment: Overview of an Emerging Therapeutic Approach.Circulation · 2024Review
- [Catheter-assisted local lysis therapy for submassive pulmonary embolism].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Review
- Chemical Adjustment of Fibrinolysis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Endovascular management of acute and subacute venous thoracic outlet syndrome.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Review
- High systemic inflammation response index level is associated with an increased risk of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis: a large retrospective study.Annals of medicine · 2023Article
- The choroid plexus: a door between the blood and the brain for tissue-type plasminogen activator.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2022Article
- Neurological Complications of Pulmonary Embolism: a Literature Review.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2021Review
- Feasibility of anticoagulation using low molecular-weight heparin during catheter-directed thrombolysis for lower extremity deep venous thrombosis.Thrombosis journal · 2021Article
- Safety of Dabigatran as an Anticoagulant: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Thrombolytic therapy might reduce venous thromboembolism-related mortality and morbidity, but it could also increase the risk of major bleeding. We systematically reviewed the literature to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of thrombolytics in patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or deep venous thrombosis (DVT). We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for relevant randomized controlled trials up to February 2019. Multiple investigators independently screened and collected data. We included 45 studies (4740 participants). Pooled estimates of PE studies indicate probable reduction in mortality with thrombolysis (risk ratio [RR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.94) (moderate certainty) and possible reduction in nonfatal PE recurrence (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35-0.89) (low certainty). Pooled estimates of DVT studies indicate the possible absence of effects on mortality (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.26-2.28) (low certainty) and recurrent DVT (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.56-1.76) (low certainty), but possible reduction in postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) with thrombolytics (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.83) (low certainty). Pooled estimates of the complete body of evidence indicate increases in major bleeding (RR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.46-2.46) (high certainty) and a probable increase in intracranial bleeding (RR, 3.17; 95% CI 1.19-8.41) (moderate certainty) with thrombolytics. Our findings indicate that thrombolytics probably reduce mortality in patients with submassive- or intermediate-risk PE and may reduce PTS in patients with proximal DVT at the expense of a significant increase in major bleeding. Because the balance between benefits and harms is profoundly influenced by the baseline risks of critical outcomes, stakeholders involved in decision making would need to weigh these effects to define which clinical scenarios merit the use of thrombolytics.
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.