ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2026
Safety profile and resource utilisation associated with systemic alteplase versus unfractionated heparin in intermediate-high risk pulmonary embolism: a prospective ICU cohort study.
Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Full-dose systemic thrombolysis reduces haemodynamic decompensation in intermediate-high risk pulmonary embolism (PE) but increases bleeding risk, and its real-world safety profile in ICU settings remains incompletely characterised. We describe treatment selection patterns, safety outcomes, and resource utilisation associated with systemic alteplase versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) in ICU-managed intermediate-high risk PE. Prospective single-centre cohort; 80 adults with CTPA-confirmed intermediate-high risk PE (2020-2024), 40 per arm. Outcomes included mortality, bleeding, clinical deterioration, and ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS). Firth penalised logistic regression was used for binary outcomes with complete separation; negative binomial regression with covariate adjustment (age, APACHE II, Charlson Comorbidity Index, PESI class) for LOS. Clinicians preferentially selected alteplase for younger patients with greater PE-specific severity markers, and UFH for older, more comorbid patients with higher physiological derangement. Major bleeding was rare in both groups (UFH 2/40; alteplase 1/40; P = 0.781), with no intracranial or fatal events. Clinical deterioration occurred exclusively in the UFH group (17.5% vs 0%; P = 0.012), though most events represented rescue thrombolysis, structurally unobservable in the alteplase arm; no residual signal persisted after its exclusion (adjusted OR 0.77; P = 0.89). ICU LOS (rate ratio 0.70; P = 0.007) and hospital LOS (rate ratio 0.73; P = 0.019) were shorter with alteplase after covariate adjustment. In this prospective ICU cohort of carefully selected intermediate-high risk PE patients, systemic alteplase was associated with a favourable safety profile and shorter hospitalisation. These hypothesis-generating findings support prospective studies targeting ICU-managed intermediate-high risk PE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42313136What 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.