ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2024
Comparison of Qanadli score with conventional risk stratifiers in non-massive pulmonary emboli.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of the Pulmonary Artery Obstruction Index Ratio in Predicting the Clinical Course of Pulmonary Embolism.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- COVID-19: A Disease Driven by Protease/Antiprotease Imbalance? A Specific Review Five Years into the Pandemic.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe management and risk stratification of non-massive pulmonary embolism (PE) remain unclear. However, early assessment of PE severity can aid physicians in establishing better treatment milestones. There has been no direct comparison of mortality rates in patients with non-massive PE, and existing data are sometimes contradictory. Therefore, we examined the relationship between the Qanadli index and conventional risk stratifiers in PE.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 200 consecutively selected patients diagnosed with PE. The assessment included computed tomography pulmonary angiography, electrocardiography, echocardiography findings, outcomes, and a comparison with the Simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (SPESI) score. Descriptive, regression, and receiver operating characteristic analyses were performed.
resultsThe mean Qanadli score was 13.5 ± 1.15. Pearson correlation analysis revealed significant associations between the total Qanadli score and several variables: right ventricular enlargement, follow-up ejection fraction, and SPESI score. Although the Qanadli score did not significantly predict mortality, the risk of death increased by 58.8% for each 1-unit increase in the SPESI score.
conclusionsAlthough the Qanadli index is valuable in assessing PE and guiding treatment strategies, its standalone predictive value for mortality may be insufficient. Therefore, incorporating scoring systems such as the SPESI and echocardiographic findings is recommended for more accurate mortality prediction.
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.