Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38380194›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Thrombolysis vs Anticoagulation: Unveiling the Trade-Offs in Massive Pulmonary Embolism.

Tamam Mohamad, Eyas Kanaan, Ikponmwosa J Ogieuhi, Anitte Shah Mannaparambil, Rubela Ray, Laith Wail Majed Al-Nazer, Hajra Munir Ahmed, Muzaffer Hussain, Narendar Kumar, Komal Kumari and 3 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tamam MohamadCardiovascular Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, USA.
Eyas KanaanInternal Medicine, Corewell Health, Grand Rapids, USA.
Ikponmwosa J OgieuhiPhysiology, University of Benin, Benin City, NGA.
Anitte Shah MannaparambilPublic Health, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, GBR.
Rubela RayInternal Medicine, Bankura Sammilani Medical College and Hospital, Bankura, IND.
Laith Wail Majed Al-NazerMedicine, University of Jordan, Amman, JOR.
Hajra Munir AhmedMedicine, Al Zafer Hospital, Jeddah, SAU.
Muzaffer HussainMedicine, Karachi Medical and Dental College, Karachi, PAK.
Narendar KumarInternal Medicine, Burjeel Hospital, Abu Dhabi, ARE.
Komal KumariMedicine, NMC Royal Family Medical Centre, Abu Dhabi, ARE.
Muhammad NadeemMedicine, Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar, PAK.
Sanvi KumariInternal Medicine, Jinnah Sindh Medical University, Karachi, PAK.
Giustino VarrassiPain Medicine, Paolo Procacci Foundation, Rome, ITA.
Fondazione Roma · ITJinnah Sindh Medical University · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Massive pulmonary embolism (MPE) is a severe form of venous thromboembolism (VTE) wherein enormous blood clots block the pulmonary arteries, resulting in substantial illness and death. Even with the progress made in diagnostic methods and treatments, the most effective approach for managing MPE is still a topic of considerable discussion. This study examines the delicate equilibrium between thrombolysis and anticoagulation in managing the problematic clinical situation posed by MPE, elucidating the compromises linked to each strategy. The genesis of MPE lies in the pathophysiology of VTE, when blood clots that originate from deep veins in the lower legs or pelvis move to the pulmonary vasculature, leading to an abrupt blockage. This obstruction leads to a series of hemodynamic alterations, such as elevated pulmonary vascular resistance, strain on the right ventricle, and compromised cardiac output, finally resulting in cardiovascular collapse. The seriousness of MPE is commonly categorized according to hemodynamic stability, with significant cases presenting immediate risks to patient survival. Traditionally, heparin has been the primary approach to managing MPE to prevent the spread of blood clots and their movement to other parts of the body. Nevertheless, there have been ongoing discussions regarding the effectiveness of thrombolysis, which entails the immediate delivery of fibrinolytic drugs to remove the blood clot. The use of thrombolysis in managing MPE is being reconsidered because of concerns over bleeding complications and long-term results despite its capacity to resolve the blocking clot quickly. This review rigorously analyzes the current body of evidence, exploring the intricacies of thrombolysis and anticoagulation in MPE. The focus is on evaluating the risk-benefit balance of each treatment option, considering aspects such as the patient's other medical conditions, hemodynamic stability, and potential long-term consequences. This review aims to clarify the complexities of the thrombolysis versus anticoagulation dilemma. It seeks to provide clinicians, researchers, and policymakers with a thorough understanding of the trade-offs in managing MPE. The goal is to facilitate informed decision-making and enhance patient outcomes.

Indexed as

anticoagulationhemodynamic stabilitymassive pulmonary embolismpulmonary embolismthrombolysisvenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID38380194
PMCPMC10877223
OpenAlexW4391062094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.