The Role of Early Rehabilitation in Treatment of Acute Pulmonary Embolism—A Narrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a life-threatening condition that frequently results in persistent exertional dyspnea, reduced exercise tolerance, and psychological distress, even after acute-phase management. Despite growing recognition of post-PE impairments, structured early rehabilitation remains underutilized. This narrative review aims to evaluate current evidence on the role, components, and outcomes of early rehabilitation strategies following acute PE. Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library. Articles published between 2020 and 2025 were screened for relevance to early rehabilitation in PE patients. Inclusion criteria prioritized randomized controlled trials, prospective studies, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews. Study quality was assessed using Cochrane, Newcastle–Ottawa, and AMSTAR 2 tools. Results: Out of 306 records, 158 studies were included. Early pulmonary rehabilitation—including aerobic and resistance exercise, inspiratory muscle training, and psychological support—demonstrated improvements in functional capacity, dyspnea, and quality of life, without adverse effects. Supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids and vitamin D may further mitigate thromboembolic risk via anti-inflammatory pathways. However, evidence remains predominantly observational, with limited high-quality data addressing timing, dosage, and patient stratification. Conclusions: Early, individualized rehabilitation appears safe and potentially beneficial in improving recovery and limiting complications after acute PE. Nonetheless, the absence of robust randomized trials underscores the urgent need for hypothesis-driven research to establish standardized, evidence-based rehabilitation protocols and guidelines tailored to risk stratification and patient phenotype, so as not to prolong recovery time and keep survivors from becoming disabled.
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 | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".