SynthesisBMJ open2026
Association of fragmented QRS complex with mortality and clinical outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism: an updated meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo provide an updated and methodologically rigorous assessment of the association of fragmented QRS (fQRS) on ECG with mortality and other clinical outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism (PE).
designSystematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies using a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model for all pooled analyses. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic, with I²>50% indicating substantial heterogeneity. Study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), and publication bias was assessed by funnel plot inspection.
participantsA systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library was conducted up to 13 August 2025. Observational studies investigating the association between fQRS and outcomes (mortality, cardiogenic shock, treatment escalation) in adults with confirmed PE were included. Patients were classified based on the presence or absence of fQRS on admission ECG. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality (in-hospital and long-term). Secondary outcomes included cardiogenic shock and treatment escalation (thrombolysis, surgical embolectomy or mechanical ventilation).
resultsFive studies involving 1383 patients were included. All included studies scored ≥7 on the NOS, indicating moderate-to-high methodological quality. The presence of fQRS was significantly associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality (OR 3.40; 95% CI 1.72 to 6.71; p=0.0004; I²=51%), long-term mortality (OR 3.90; 95% CI 1.80 to 8.47; p=0.0006; I²=47%) and cardiogenic shock (OR 4.88; 95% CI 1.70 to 14.01; p=0.003; I²=65%). No significant association was found with the use of thrombolysis, surgical embolectomy or mechanical ventilation. Funnel plot inspection revealed asymmetry, suggesting potential publication bias; however, formal testing was limited by the small number of included studies. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the primary findings. All pooled estimates were derived from unadjusted effect sizes extracted from the primary studies.
conclusionsIn this updated meta-analysis, fQRS was a robust and readily available risk marker for early and late mortality and cardiogenic shock in patients with PE. Standardised ECG interpretation may enhance risk stratification and guide early, intensive management. Further large-scale, prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings across diverse populations and to establish standardised criteria for fQRS assessment in this setting.CRD420251127962.
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.