MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389221699 · doi:10.1182/blood-2023-182859

Fatal Pulmonary Embolism, Fatal Bleeding and Intracranial Hemorrhage with Systemic and Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis in Intermediate-High and High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

2023· review· en· W4389221699 on OpenAlexaff
Anuj Bharatkumar Patel, Vicky Mai, Lucia Caiano, Mathieu Mercier, Marc Carrier, Grégoire Le Gal, Lana A. Castellucci

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary embolismSurgeryInternal medicineThrombolysisConfidence intervalMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Thrombolysis, either systemic (ST) or catheter-directed (CDT), may reduce mortality in patients with intermediate-high and high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE), but with an increased risk of major bleeding (MB). Moreover, uncertainties remain for other efficacy and safety outcomes, such as fatal PE, fatal bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Aims: To evaluate fatal PE, fatal bleeding and ICH with ST and CDT in patients with intermediate-high and high-risk PE. Methods: We performed a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane from inception to December 2022. Randomized trials and cohort/observational studies of patients with intermediate-high and high-risk PE were included. We report fatal PE, fatal bleeding and ICH; mortality and MB have been previously reported. Pooled proportions with their 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for each treatment group. Results: One hundred and fifty-eight studies (87,874 patients) were included. In patients treated with ST, 30-day mortality and MB occurred in 10.4% (95%CI 6.6%-14.8%; I 2=99%) and in 8.0% (95%CI 5.8%-10.5%; I 2=96%), respectively. Fatal PE occurred in 3.9% (95%CI 2.1%-6.3%; I 2=88%), fatal bleeding in 1.7% (95%CI 1.3%-2.3%; I 2=8%) and ICH in 1.6% (95%CI 1.3%-1.9%; I 2=17%). In patients treated with CDT, 30-day mortality and MB occurred in 5.3% (95%CI 3.6%-7.3%; I 2=93%) and in 5.4% (95%CI 3.8%-7.2%; I 2=87%), respectively. Fatal PE occurred in 1.5% (95%CI 1.0%-2.0%; I 2=2%), fatal bleeding in 1.2% (95%CI 0.8%-1.6%; I 2=0%) and ICH in 0.6% (95%CI 0.4%-0.9%; I 2=7%). In patients treated with anticoagulation alone, 30-day mortality and MB occurred in 9.9% (95%CI 7.1%-13.1%; I 2=97%) and in 3.8% (95%CI 2.6%-5.4%; I 2=66%), respectively. Fatal PE occurred in 3.3% (95%CI 1.9%-5.2%; I 2=65%), fatal bleeding in 0.5% (95%CI 0.2%-0.9%; I 2=0%) and ICH in 0.7% (95%CI 0.3%-1.3%; I 2=64%). Conclusion: In patients with intermediate-high and high-risk PE, fatal PE was non-negligeable in all treatment modalities and must be balanced with equally important fatal bleeding event rates. Additional studies are needed to further assess these efficacy and safety parameters of thrombolytics in patients with intermediate-high and high risk PE.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.035
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→