ReviewCureus2024
Efficacy and Safety of Systemic Thrombolysis and Catheter-Directed Therapy in Pulmonary Embolism: A Narrative Review.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Interventional Management of Intermediate-High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism: Current Evidence, Patient Selection and Personalised Treatment Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Surgical Pulmonary Embolectomy Versus Systemic Thrombolysis in High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism: A Retrospective Single-Center Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the third most frequent cause of acute cardiovascular presentation after myocardial infarction and stroke. The treatment approach for PE consists of hemodynamic and respiratory support, anticoagulation, reperfusion treatment, and vena cava filters. Reperfusion treatment consists of systemic thrombolysis (recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator, streptokinase, and urokinase); percutaneous catheter-directed therapy (CDT); and surgical embolectomy. CDT is an emerging treatment, with most data derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or case series. Currently, there is a lack of data on clinical efficacy and safety outcomes and a lack of large studies that directly compare CDT with systemic thrombolysis or surgical embolectomy. This narrative review aims to explore the efficacy and safety of systemic thrombolysis and CDT in pulmonary embolism. Clinical trials have studied CDT for more than a decade now and have shown that CDT improves the post-procedural right ventricular (RV)/left ventricular (LV) ratio and has a reduced rate of bleeding episodes and all-cause mortality. However, there is a lack of large prospective RCTs studying the effects of CDT in intermediate-high-risk PE patients to determine which patients from this sub-group require CDT both in terms of improving short-term mortality risk and long-term morbidity (such as chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) and post-PE syndrome). Future clinical trials need to focus on identifying which patient groups will benefit from CDT over anticoagulation and if there are any advantages of using the EkoSonic endovascular system (EKOS) (ultrasound (US)-assisted CDT) over standard CDT. In addition, the scientific community needs to study the healthcare costs of CDT over traditional treatment, which is relevant for public health systems such as the National Health Service (NHS). Lastly, we need standardized guidelines for the use of thrombectomy systems since pulmonary embolism is a complex disease requiring a multifaceted and nuanced treatment approach.
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.