ArticleCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions2026
Mechanical Thrombectomy Versus Anticoagulation in Intermediate-Risk Pulmonary Embolism: A Risk-Stratified, Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.
Article in Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mechanical Thrombectomy Versus Anticoagulation in Intermediate-Risk Pulmonary Embolism: A Risk-Stratified, Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
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
objectivesTo compare 1-year all-cause mortality and long-term cardiopulmonary outcomes in intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) treated with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) versus anticoagulation (AC).
backgroundWhether MT confers a survival advantage-and whether this benefit differs across intermediate risk PE subgroups remains unknown.
methodsRetrospective, 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort study using the TriNetX Analytics Network (2010-2026). Adults with acute PE were stratified into low-intermediate (corresponding to AHA/ACC PE Category C1-C2 in the 2026 AHA/ACC PE Guideline) and high-intermediate (corresponding to AHA/ACC PE Category C3) risk subgroups. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at 365 days. Secondary endpoints included new-onset pulmonary hypertension, right heart failure, acute respiratory failure, and bleeding. IRB waiver was applicable per HIPAA de-identification standards.
resultsAfter matching, 2717 patients per arm were included in the low-intermediate risk cohort and 1150 per arm in the high-intermediate risk cohort. MT was associated with lower 1-year all-cause mortality in both subgroups: low-intermediate risk (11.0% vs. 17.8%; HR 0.642 [95% CI 0.556-0.741]; p < 0.001) and high-intermediate risk (7.0% vs. 11.0%; HR 0.631 [95% CI 0.475-0.839]; p = 0.002). In low-intermediate risk PE, MT was associated with increased pulmonary hypertension (HR 1.578; p < 0.001) and right heart failure (HR 4.473; p < 0.001). In high-intermediate risk PE, MT reduced pulmonary hypertension (HR 0.764; p = 0.044) and bleeding (HR 0.744; p = 0.048).
conclusionsMT was associated with reduced 1-year mortality compared with AC alone in intermediate-risk PE. The net clinical benefit is risk-profile dependent: MT appears favorable in high-intermediate risk (AHA/ACC Category C3-equivalent) PE, whereas in low-intermediate risk (AHA/ACC Category C1-C2-equivalent) PE the apparent survival advantage is offset by elevated rates of pulmonary hypertension and right heart failure. These findings are hypothesis-generating and require validation in adequately powered randomized controlled trials with pre-specified long-term mortality endpoints.
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.