Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38765213›Full record

ReviewMethodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal2024

From Trendelenburg to PERTs: Evolution in the Management of Massive Pulmonary Embolism.

Pavan Thangudu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Pulmonary embolism consensus.Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2026
    Article
  3. 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

1 author.

Pavan ThanguduPulmonary Disease & Critical Care, Memorial Hermann Health System, The Woodlands, Texas, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5323-1311

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Massive pulmonary embolism (MPE) is a serious condition affecting the pulmonary arteries and is difficult to diagnose, triage, and treat. The American College of Chest Physicians (AHA) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) have different classification approaches for PE, with the AHA defining three subtypes and the ESC four. Misdiagnosis is common, leading to delayed or inadequate treatment. The incidence of PE-related death rates has been increasing over the years, and mortality rates vary depending on the subtype of PE, with MPE having the highest mortality rate. The current definition of MPE originated from early surgical embolectomy cases and discussions among experts. However, this definition fails to capture patients at the point of maximal benefit because it is based on late findings of MPE. Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams (PERTs) have emerged as a fundamental shift in the management of MPE, with a focus on high-risk and MPE cases and a goal of rapidly connecting patients with appropriate therapies based on up-to-date evidence. This review highlights the challenges in diagnosing and managing MPE and emphasizes the importance of PERTs and risk stratification scores in improving outcomes for patients with PE.

Indexed as

Predictive Value of TestsPulmonary EmbolismClinical Decision-MakingDecision Support TechniquesEmbolectomyHumansPatient Care TeamRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsThrombolytic TherapyTreatment Outcomemassive pulmonary embolismpulmonary embolism classificationpulmonary embolism misdiagnosispulmonary embolism response teams (PERTS)

Identifiers

PMID38765213
PMCPMC11100543

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.