Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37719239›Full record

ArticleBreathe (Sheffield, England)2023

When should we involve interventional radiology in the management of acute pulmonary embolism?

María Barca-Hernando, Luis Jara-Palomares

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breathe (Sheffield, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. The changing face of the modern respiratory clinician.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

María Barca-HernandoRespiratory Department, Hospital Virgen del Rocio, Sevilla, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6908-0841
Luis Jara-PalomaresRespiratory Department, Hospital Virgen del Rocio, Sevilla, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4125-3376

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common disease associated with high morbidity and mortality. Currently, guidelines recommend systemic thrombolysis in patients with haemodynamic instability (high-risk PE) or patients with intermediate-high-risk PE with haemodynamic deterioration. Nevertheless, more than half of high-risk PE patients do not receive systemic thrombolysis due to a perceived increased risk of bleeding. In these cases, percutaneous catheter-directed therapy (CDT) or surgical embolectomy should be considered. CDT has emerged and appears to be an effective alternative in treating PE, with a hypothetical lower risk of bleeding than systemic thrombolysis, acting directly in the thrombus with a much lower dose of thrombolytic drug or even without thrombolytic therapy. CDT techniques include catheter-directed clot aspiration or fragmentation, mechanical embolectomy, local thrombolysis, and combined pharmaco-mechanical approaches. A few observational prospective studies have demonstrated that CDT improves right ventricular function with a low rate of haemorrhage. Nevertheless, the evidence from randomised controlled trials is scarce. Here we review different scenarios where CDT may be useful and trials ongoing in this field. These results may change the upcoming guidelines for management and treatment of PE, establishing CDT as a recommended treatment in patients with acute intermediate-high-risk PE.

Identifiers

PMID37719239
PMCPMC10501706

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.