ArticleJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2025
Clinical Outcomes and Treatment Strategies in Catastrophic High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism: A Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) is a life-threatening condition characterized by hemodynamic instability, often leading to catastrophic outcomes such as cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with high-risk PE at a single tertiary center between 2018 and 2024. Catastrophic PE was defined as high-risk PE with hemodynamic collapse, including cardiac arrest and/or the requirement for high-dose vasopressors. Data on clinical characteristics, treatments, and outcomes were analyzed. Catastrophic PE accounted for 59% of cases. Systemic thrombolysis was the most frequent reperfusion strategy (67%), while catheter-directed therapies (35.4%) and VA-ECMO (11.4%) were used selectively. Despite aggressive management, catastrophic PE exhibited significantly higher mortality rates at 7 days (40%) and 30 days (49%) compared to non-catastrophic cases (9% and 12.5%, respectively). These patients also showed higher rates of multiorgan failure and required more invasive support. This study underscores the importance of early recognition and tailored treatment strategies for catastrophic PE, highlighting its distinct clinical presentation and worse outcomes compared to non-catastrophic high-risk PE. Further research is essential to refine treatment protocols and improve survival in this critically ill population, emphasizing the utility of a standardized classification to enhance clinical management and research consistency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.