What type of study is this?

This is a Systematic Review study.

What question did this study set out to answer?

To compare the safety and efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy versus anticoagulation therapy in treating pulmonary embolism.

December 9, 2025

Mechanical Thrombectomy Versus Conventional Anticoagulants Alone in Treatment of Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Puntos clave

To compare the safety and efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy versus anticoagulation therapy in treating pulmonary embolism.
Conducted systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines
Included studies on mortality, hospital stay, complications, and ICU stay
Screened 5661 studies, including 6 studies with 1509 patients
Mechanical thrombectomy showed a trend toward lower all-cause mortality (OR = 0.5)
Significantly reduced ICU length of stay versus anticoagulant therapy (MD: −3.01 days, p = 0.02)
No significant difference in overall complications or hospital stay between groups.

Resumen

ABSTRACT Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a life‐threatening condition and a leading cause of sudden death. It occurs when a thrombus develops in the venous system and then dislodges to embolize into the pulmonary arteries, causing obstruction. The current mainstay of treatment is anticoagulation. Adjunct mechanical thrombectomy (MT) or pharmacological thrombolysis may be added, following a risk assessment, for intermediate to massive PE. However, physicians remain reluctant to adopt them as first‐line treatment when comparing the benefits and risks to anticoagulation alone. This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of MT with anticoagulation therapy alone in the treatment of intermediate to large‐sized PE patients, focusing on hospital stay, ICU admission, morbidity, and mortality. Following PRISMA guidelines, a search was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for studies published from inception up to July 5, 2025. Studies were then screened based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Newcastle−Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of evidence. Studies were required to report at least one of the following outcomes: mortality rate, hospital stay, overall complications, and ICU stay. Screening p = 0.05; I 2 = 46%) and a significantly lower rate of ICU length of stay by 3.0 days than those in the anticoagulant therapy group (MD: − 3.01, 95% CI, −5.57 to −0.44, p = 0.02; I 2 = 83%). No significant difference was found in overall complications and length of hospital stay between the MT and anticoagulant groups. However, MT was associated with lower rates of overall complications by 49% (OR = 0.51, 95% CI, 0.10 to 2.67, p = 0.43; I 2 = 83%) and shorter hospital stays (MD: −0.76; 95% CI, −4.64 to 3.13, p = 0.70; I 2 = 93%). MT showed greater efficacy in reducing mortality rates and ICU stay compared to intermediate to high‐risk PE patients treated with conventional anticoagulant therapy.

Preguntar a la IA

Me gusta

Guardar