Why the study?
Does systemic or catheter-based thrombolytic therapy improve outcomes in patients with acute pulmonary embolism and right ventricular strain or shock?
Population
Patients with acute pulmonary embolism accompanied by either right ventricular strain or shock
Comparison
Systemic or catheter-based thrombolytic therapy vs Standard anticoagulation
Design
Review
Authors
Loading...
Supports selective thrombolysis in sub-massive PE with RV strain despite bleeding risk; leaves open need for RCTs to guide practice.
Does systemic or catheter-based thrombolytic therapy improve outcomes in patients with acute pulmonary embolism and right ventricular strain or shock?
This review highlights the role of systemic or catheter-based thrombolytic therapy in massive and high-risk sub-massive pulmonary embolism, emphasizing the balance between hemodynamic improvement and bleeding risk.
Chodakowski et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: