ArticleJournal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)2022
2022 Update of the Consensus on the Rational Use of Antithrombotics and Thrombolytics in Veterinary Critical Care (CURATIVE) Domain 6: Defining rational use of thrombolytics.
Article in Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multicentre aortic thromboembolism thrombolysis evaluation in a retrospective study of 183 cats: the MATTERS study.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Treatment and Prevention of Cardiogenic Arterial Thromboembolism in the Cat: A Systematic Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Evolving FATE: A New Lens on the Pathogenesis and Management of Feline Cardiogenic Arterial Thromboembolism.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Use of alteplase continuous rate infusion, pentoxifylline, and cyproheptadine in association or not, in acute feline aortic thromboembolism: a study of nine cats.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Indications and outcomes of rivaroxaban use in cats.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Feline Aortic Thromboembolism: Recent advances and future prospects.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2024Review
- 2022 Update of the Consensus on the Rational Use of Antithrombotics and Thrombolytics in Veterinary Critical Care (CURATIVE) Domain 6: Defining rational use of thrombolytics.Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001) · 2022Article
- Rational approach to feline medical emergencies: part 1.Journal of feline medicine and surgeryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 11 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo systematically review available evidence and establish guidelines related to the use of thrombolytics for the management of small animals with suspected or confirmed thrombosis.
designPICO (Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcome) questions were formulated, and worksheets completed as part of a standardized and systematic literature evaluation. The population of interest included dogs and cats (considered separately) and arterial and venous thrombosis. The interventions assessed were the use of thrombolytics, compared to no thrombolytics, with or without anticoagulants or antiplatelet agents. Specific protocols for recombinant tissue plasminogen activator were also evaluated. Outcomes assessed included efficacy and safety. Relevant articles were categorized according to level of evidence, quality, and as to whether they supported, were neutral to, or opposed the PICO questions. Conclusions from the PICO worksheets were used to draft guidelines, which were subsequently refined via Delphi surveys undertaken by the Consensus on the Rational Use of Antithrombotics and Thrombolytics in Veterinary Critical Care (CURATIVE) working group.
resultsFourteen PICO questions were developed, generating 14 guidelines. The majority of the literature addressing the PICO questions in dogs is experimental studies (level of evidence 3), thus providing insufficient evidence to determine if thrombolysis improves patient-centered outcomes. In cats, literature was more limited and often neutral to the PICO questions, precluding strong evidence-based recommendations for thrombolytic use. Rather, for both species, suggestions are made regarding considerations for when thrombolytic drugs may be considered, the combination of thrombolytics with anticoagulant or antiplatelet drugs, and the choice of thrombolytic agent.
conclusionsSubstantial additional research is needed to address the role of thrombolytics for the treatment of arterial and venous thrombosis in dogs and cats. Clinical trials with patient-centered outcomes will be most valuable for addressing knowledge gaps in the field.
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.