@article{JTD4427,
author = {Qixia Xu and Ke Huang and Zhenguo Zhai and Yuanhua Yang and Jun Wang and Chen Wang},
title = {Initial thrombolysis treatment compared with anticoagulation for acute intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism: a meta-analysis},
journal = {Journal of Thoracic Disease},
volume = {7},
number = {5},
year = {2015},
keywords = {},
abstract = {Background: The use of thrombolysis in patients with acute, intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) remains controversial. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of thrombolysis and anticoagulation treatments for intermediate-risk PE patients.
Methods: Two investigators independently reviewed the literature and collected data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of thrombolysis for intermediate-risk PE in the PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Databases (CBM).
Results: A total of 1,631 intermediate-risk PE patients from seven studies were included. Significant differences were not found regarding the 30-day, all-cause mortality rates between the thrombolytic and anticoagulant groups [odds ratio (OR), 0.60; 95% confident interval (CI), 0.34-1.06; P=0.08]. The rate of clinical deterioration in the thrombolytic group was lower than that in the anticoagulant group (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.18-0.41; P},
issn = {2077-6624}, url = {https://jtd.amegroups.org/article/view/4427}
}