ReviewEuropean heart journal open2025
Endovascular management of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism: evidence, outstanding questions, drivers of utilization, and the horizon.
Review in European heart journal open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Mechanical Thrombectomy Versus Anticoagulation in Intermediate-Risk Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Pooled it
- The incidence and associated factors of pulmonary embolism after cardiac surgery: A retrospective nationwide inpatient sample database study.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Article
- Breaking embolic ground: the clot thickens in intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism.European heart journal open · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In patients with acute intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) guidelines recommend systemic anticoagulation (Class I; Level A), but intermediate-risk patients are increasingly being treated with adjunctive endovascular (catheter-based) therapies. This review defines outstanding clinical questions, contextualizes completed and ongoing clinical studies, examines plausible drivers of utilization, and anticipates scenarios on the horizon for endovascular therapy in this large and heterogenous subgroup of patients. In intermediate-risk PE, up-front adjunctive systemic thrombolysis reduces haemodynamic deterioration or death, but the small benefit is outweighed by the risk of major bleeding. Endovascular modalities (e.g. ultrasound-assisted catheter directed thrombolysis, mechanical thrombectomy) aim to uphold these benefits while improving upon safety. Since 2014, five devices have entered the market based primarily on single-arm studies demonstrating short-term improvements in surrogate markers of effectiveness (e.g. 48 h reduction in RV/LV ratio). While thousands of patients with intermediate-risk PE (primarily intermediate-
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.