ArticleJACC. Advances2024
Incidence, Management, and Outcomes of Pulmonary Embolism at Tertiary Pediatric Hospitals in the United States.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2024. 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.
- PERC-Peds rule for bedside exclusion of pulmonary embolism without radiation in children in the USA (BEEPER): a multicentre, prospective, observational, diagnostic accuracy study.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2026Observational
- Advances in treatment and prevention of pulmonary thromboembolism associated with Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia in children.Pediatric research · 2026Review
- Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Pediatric Pulmonary Embolism Clinical Pathway and Pulmonary Embolism Response Team.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2025Observational
- Childhood Pulmonary Embolism: Characterizing a Critical and Challenging Diagnosis.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- Unusual Thromboembolic Sequelae of MRSA Bacteremia in A Pediatric Patient: A Case Report.Journal of investigative medicine high impact case reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pediatric pulmonary embolism (PE) is rare and potentially life-threatening. Though thrombolysis and thrombectomy are increasingly used in adult PE, trends in pediatric treatment and outcomes remain incompletely described. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to describe the incidence of PE, proportion of cases treated with anticoagulation alone, systemic thrombolysis, and directed therapy (local thrombolysis and thrombectomy), clinical outcomes, and total costs. Methods: A multicenter observational study was performed using administrative data from the Pediatric Health Information System database to study PE treated at U.S. pediatric hospitals from 2015 to 2021. Outcomes by treatment were evaluated using multivariable generalized linear mixed effects models. Results: Of 3,136 subjects, 70% were at least 12 years of age, and 46% were male. Sixty-two percent had at least 1 comorbidity, and congenital heart disease of any kind was the most prevalent (20%). Eighty-eight percent of subjects received anticoagulation alone, 7% received systemic thrombolysis, and 5% received directed therapy. Overall in-hospital mortality was 7.5%. Treatment approach did not change over time ( Conclusions: Pediatric patients with PE have a high incidence of underlying chronic disease. Anticoagulation alone remains the mainstay of treatment, with thrombolysis and thrombectomy rarely being used. Given the relative rarity of pediatric PE, additional research requiring innovative study designs is paramount.
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.