Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33042325›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiovascular risk reports2020

Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism.

Connor Tice, Matthew Seigerman, Paul Fiorilli, Steven C Pugliese, Sameer Khandhar, Jay Giri, Taisei Kobayashi

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiovascular risk reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Connor Tice *Department of Internal Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA.
Matthew Seigerman *Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6188-5760
Paul FiorilliDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA.
Steven C PuglieseDivision of Pulmonology and Critical Care Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA.
Sameer KhandharDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA.
Jay GiriDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA.
Taisei KobayashiDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA.
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania · USPenn Presbyterian Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of the reviewOver 100,000 cardiovascular-related deaths annually are caused by acute pulmonary embolism (PE). While anticoagulation has historically been the foundation for treatment of PE, this review highlights the recent rapid expansion in the interventional strategies for this condition. RECENT

findingsAt the time of diagnosis, appropriate risk stratification helps to accurately identify patients who may be candidates for advanced therapeutic interventions. While systemic thrombolytics (ST) is the mostly commonly utilized intervention for high-risk PE, the risk profile of ST for intermediate-risk PE limits its use. Assessment of an individualized patient risk profile, often via a multidisciplinary pulmonary response team (PERT) model, there are various interventional strategies to consider for PE management. Novel therapeutic options include catheter-directed thrombolysis, catheter-based embolectomy, or mechanical circulatory support for certain high-risk PE patients. Current data has established safety and efficacy for catheter-based treatment of PE based on surrogate outcome measures. However, there is limited long-term data or prospective comparisons between treatment modalities and ST. While PE diagnosis has improved with modern cross-sectional imaging, there is interest in improved diagnostic models for PE that incorporate artificial intelligence and machine learning techniques. SUMMARY: In patients with acute pulmonary embolism, after appropriate risk stratification, some intermediate and high-risk patients should be considered for interventional-based treatment for PE.

Indexed as

Catheter-directed embolectomyCatheter-directed thrombolysisPulmonary embolismPulmonary embolism response team

Identifiers

PMID33042325
PMCPMC7538277
OpenAlexW3092464929

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.