Persistent right ventricular dysfunction, functional capacity limitation, exercise intolerance, and quality of life impairment following pulmonary embolism: Systematic review with meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Long-term right ventricular (RV) function, functional capacity, exercise capacity, and quality of life following pulmonary embolism (PE), and the impact of thrombolysis, are unclear. A systematic review of studies that evaluated these outcomes with ⩾ 3-month mean follow-up after PE diagnosis was performed. For each outcome, random effects meta-analyses were performed. Twenty-six studies (3671 patients) with 18-month median follow-up were included. The pooled prevalence of RV dysfunction was 18.1%. Patients treated with thrombolysis had a lower, but not statistically significant, risk of RV dysfunction versus those treated with anticoagulation (odds ratio: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.24 to 1.13, p=0.10). Pooled prevalence of at least mild functional impairment (NYHA II-IV) was 33.2%, and at least moderate functional impairment (NYHA III-IV) was 11.3%. Patients treated with thrombolysis had a lower, but not statistically significant, risk of at least moderate functional impairment versus those treated with anticoagulation (odds ratio: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.15 to 1.49, p=0.20). Pooled 6-minute walk distance was 415 m (95% CI: 372 to 458 m), SF-36 Physical Component Score was 44.8 (95% CI: 43 to 46), and Pulmonary Embolism Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire total score was 9.1. Main limitations included heterogeneity among studies for many outcomes, variation in the completeness of data reported, and inclusion of data from non-randomized, non-controlled, and retrospective studies. Persistent RV dysfunction, impaired functional status, diminished exercise capacity, and reduced QoL are common in PE survivors. The effect of thrombolysis on RV function and functional status remains unclear.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".