ArticleJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2026
Serum Endothelin-1 in Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism: A Prospective Study.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe evaluated the diagnostic discrimination of serum endothelin-1 (ET-1), copeptin, and chemerin in adults evaluated for acute pulmonary embolism (PE).
methodsThis prospective, single-center diagnostic study included 65 adults with CTPA-confirmed PE and 64 CTPA-negative controls recruited from the same emergency-department source population of patients evaluated for suspected PE. Controls were consecutively enrolled among dyspneic patients in whom CTPA excluded PE; no individual matching was used. Biomarkers were compared with D-dimer and the Wells score.
resultsET-1 was higher in the PE group (median, 12.96 vs. 6.41 pg/mL;
conclusionsET-1 was associated with acute PE in this selected sample but did not materially improve discrimination beyond established comparators. Because the near-ceiling Wells-D-dimer model and selected sampling frame limit inference, external validation in an unselected diagnostic cohort is required.
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.