The role of pulmonary embolectomy in the treatment of acute pulmonary embolism: a literature review from 1968 to 2008☆
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acute massive or submassive pulmonary embolism (PE) requires prompt diagnosis, risk-stratification and aggressive treatment. Mortality rates can rise up to 70% within the first hour of presentation and are strongly correlated with the degree of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction, cardiac arrest, and consequential congestive heart failure. While anticoagulation is universally employed, there are inadequate data to establish definitive guidelines for the management of massive PE despite the availability of multiple treatment modalities. Medical thrombolytic therapy has not been shown to significantly reduce mortality in patients with massive PE but is still widely employed, whereas surgical and catheter embolectomy are only reserved as last resort treatments for critically ill patients with hemodynamic instability, or for those who are either not candidates for or have failed thrombolysis. Following an extensive review of medical literature, we outline the treatment options for this clinical scenario while focusing on the role of surgical embolectomy. Although traditionally reserved as rescue therapy for cases of failed thrombolysis, surgical embolectomy is a safe procedure with low mortality when performed early and in a selected group of patients. Sufficient evidence exists to extend the criteria for surgical embolectomy from strictly rescue therapy to include hemodynamically stable patients with RV dysfunction. Multidisciplinary approach to this condition coupled with a meticulous surgical technique has significantly lowered the mortality associated with this surgical procedure over the last 10 years.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it