ArticleERJ open research2025
Evaluation of real-world use of pulmonary embolism thrombolysis: ERUPT.
Article in ERJ open research, 2025. 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.
- Article
- Thrombolytic therapy efficacy in cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Investigating the effect of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: International guidelines recommend systemic thrombolysis for high-risk acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Significant uncertainties remain regarding thrombolysis in non-high-risk PE and the use of reduced-dose thrombolysis. To address this, UK respiratory trainees led a multicentre UK-wide study assessing current practice. Our primary aim was to evaluate UK practice against the European Society of Cardiology recommendations (specifically to utilise full-dose thrombolysis only in high-risk PE). Secondary outcomes included mortality and an analysis of clinical factors associated with administrating reduced-dose thrombolysis. Method: This was a retrospective multicentre observational study evaluating thrombolysis of acute PE from September 2021 to September 2022 in 26 centres across the UK. Results: A total of 174 patients from 26 sites were included, with fibrinolytic dose recorded in 168 (96.6%) cases. After exclusion of 30 cases involving cardiac arrest, 26 out of 138 patients (18.8%) received reduced-dose thrombolysis. 67 (39.9%) patients underwent thrombolysis for non-high-risk PE. Factors associated with receiving reduced-dose thrombolysis included higher age (p=0.005), higher Charlson comorbidity index (p=0.008) and higher serum lactate (p=0.02). Conclusion: PE thrombolysis in the UK deviates from international guidelines in a significant minority of cases; comprising the use of reduced-dose regimens and thrombolysis in non-high-risk cases without haemodynamic deterioration. Prospective real-world studies, assessing clinical practice and outcomes following thrombolysis, should be conducted to understand the pragmatic application of evidence and inform future guidelines.
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.