ArticleArchivos de cardiologia de Mexico2026
Pulmonary embolism consensus.
Article in Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico, 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary embolism (PE) remains a major cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Despite significant advances in diagnosis and treatment, important challenges persist in the early identification of patients at risk of clinical deterioration and in the integration of clinical, imaging, and biomarker data for more accurate risk stratification.
methodA multidisciplinary panel of experts reviewed the available scientific evidence, including international guidelines, randomized clinical trials, observational studies, and contemporary registries. Recommendations were developed through a structured consensus process, with particular emphasis on areas of uncertainty or ongoing evolution in clinical practice.
resultsThis document updates recommendations on the diagnosis, risk stratification, anticoagulation, reperfusion therapies, and follow-up of patients with acute PE. A key focus is the concept of dynamic risk assessment, recognizing that clinical status may change significantly during the first hours and days after diagnosis. As an innovative proposal, the Integrated Cardiorespiratory Involvement System (SIAC) is introduced as a complementary framework that integrates hemodynamic parameters, right ventricular dysfunction, gas exchange impairment, biomarker profile, and clinical evolution. SIAC is designed to enhance traditional risk stratification models by enabling serial bedside reassessment and facilitating early identification of patients at risk of clinical deterioration and adverse outcomes.
conclusionsModern management of acute PE requires a comprehensive and dynamic approach. This consensus integrates current evidence and proposes SIAC as a complementary tool to improve prognostic assessment and support more individualized therapeutic decision-making.
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.