ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2022
Evidence-based perioperative diagnosis and management of pulmonary embolism: A systematic review.
Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electrically induced hemodynamic enhancement via sock-integrated electrodes is more comfortable and efficient at 1 hz as compared to 36 hz.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Article
- Perioperative laboratory profiles predict complications after extensive head and neck reconstruction: a proof-of-concept study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Association of Antipsychotic Drugs with the Risk of Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism: A Retrospective Study of Data from a Japanese Inpatient Database.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary embolism have multi-modal approach based on specificity, sensitivity, availability of the machine, and associated risks of imaging modalities. Aim: This review aimed to provide shreds of evidence that improve perioperative diagnosis and management of suspected pulmonary embolism. Methods: The study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline 2020. After a clear criteria has been established an electronic searching database was conducted using PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane library, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), with Key search terms included:('pulmonary embolism' AND' anesthesia management ', 'anticoagulation' AND 'pulmonary embolism', 'thrombolysis 'AND 'pulmonary embolism', 'surgery' AND' pulmonary embolism'), were used to draw the evidence.The quality of literatures were categorized based on WHO 2011 level of evidence and degree of recommendation, in addition, the study is registered with research registry unique identifying number (UIN) of reviewregistry1318." and has high quality based on AMSTAR2 assessment criteria. Results: A totally of 27 articles were included [guidelines (n = 3), Cochrane (=5), systemic reviews (n = 7), meta-analyses (=2), RCT (n = 4), cohort studies (n = 3), and cross-sectional study (n = 3) and illegible articles identified from searches of the electronic databases were imported into the ENDNOTE software version X7.1 and duplicates were removed. Discussion: Currently divergent and contradictory approaches are implemented in diagnosis and management for patients suspected of pulmonary embolism. Conclusion: All perioperative patients, especially trauma victims, prostate or orthopedic surgery, malignancy, immobility, and obesity; smokers; and oral contraceptive users, antipsychotic medications are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism and need special caution during surgery and anesthesia
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.