Key result
Catheter-directed thrombolysis plus anticoagulation significantly reduced mortality for sub-massive pulmonary embolism compared to anticoagulation alone (OR -0.99; 95% CI -1.32 to -0.66).
Why the study?
Pulmonary embolism is a critical condition with several management options, requiring assessment of thrombolytic therapy combined with anticoagulant or alone versus anticoagulant alone on clinical outcomes.
Does thrombolytic therapy combined with or without anticoagulants improve clinical outcomes compared to anticoagulants alone in patients with pulmonary embolism?
Meta-Analysis (n=12,836)
Does thrombolytic therapy combined with or without anticoagulants improve clinical outcomes compared to anticoagulants alone in patients with pulmonary embolism?
Odds Ratio: -0.99 (95% CI -1.32–-0.66)
Adding catheter-directed thrombolysis to anticoagulation improves mortality in sub-massive pulmonary embolism but increases major bleeding risk, while systemic thrombolysis reduces recurrence in acute intermediate PE.
Thrombolysis plus anticoagulation may reduce submassive PE mortality; extends evidence on major bleeding trade-offs in intermediate-risk patients.
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a critical condition requiring effective management strategies. Several options are available, including thrombolytic therapy and anticoagulants. OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of thrombolytic therapy either combined with anticoagulant (AC) or alone versus AC alone on mortality, recurrence, clinical deterioration, bleeding, and hospital stay. METHOD: This study included 25 previously published studies from 1990 to 2023, with a total of 12 836 participants. Dichotomous and continuous analysis models were used to evaluate outcomes, with heterogeneity and publication bias tests applied. A random model was used for data analysis. Several databases were searched for the identification and inclusion of studies, such as Ovid, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Embase. RESULTS: For sub-massive PE, CDT plus AC significantly reduced in-hospital, 30-day, and 12-month mortality compared to AC alone, odds ratio (OR) of -0.99 (95% CI [-1.32 to -0.66]), with increased major bleeding risk but no difference in minor bleeding or hospital stay, OR = 0.46, 95% CI [-0.03 to 0.96]). For acute intermediate PE, systemic thrombolytic therapy did not affect all-cause or in-hospital mortality but increased minor bleeding, reduced recurrent PE, and prevented clinical deterioration. The heterogeneity of different models in the current study varied from 0% to 37.9%. CONCLUSION: The addition of CDT to AC improves mortality outcomes for sub-massive PE but raises the risk of major bleeding. Systemic thrombolytic therapy reduces recurrence and clinical decline in acute intermediate PE despite increasing minor bleeding. Individualized patient assessment is essential for optimizing PE management strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Su et al. (2024) conducted a meta-analysis in Pulmonary embolism (n=12,836). Thrombolytic therapy (CDT or systemic) vs. Anticoagulant alone was evaluated on In-hospital, 30-day, and 12-month mortality (sub-massive PE) (OR -0.99, 95% CI -1.32 to -0.66). Catheter-directed thrombolysis plus anticoagulation significantly reduced mortality for sub-massive pulmonary embolism compared to anticoagulation alone (OR -0.99; 95% CI -1.32 to -0.66).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: