Outcomes with Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis versus Mechanical Thrombectomy for Patients with Intermediate/High Risk Pulmonary Embolism: A Meta-Analysis of 24,090 Patients.

What was studied

This was a meta-analysis, which pools results from many studies. It looked at people with pulmonary embolism, or PE, at intermediate or high risk. All of them got care through a thin tube, called a catheter. One way sends clot-busting drugs through the tube, called CDT. The other way pulls the clot out with a device, called MT. The team searched study databases up to June 2026.

What they found

In total, 18 studies with 24,090 people were included. People treated with CDT stayed longer in intensive care than those with MT. The average gap was 1.01 days. Death from any cause did not differ clearly between the groups. Major bleeding also did not differ clearly. Other results were also alike, such as stroke and the heart stopping. Going back to hospital, blood given, and hospital stay were alike too.

What it means for patients

The authors say both ways gave alike results for these people. The one clear gap was a longer intensive care stay with CDT. The study did not show a clear gap in deaths or major bleeding.

Why it is not certain yet

The authors note that few randomized trials have compared these ways. They call for larger, well planned randomized trials to check these results. The abstract does not say how many of the 18 studies were randomized. A review can only be as good as the studies in it.

Source

Outcomes with Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis versus Mechanical Thrombectomy for Patients with Intermediate/High Risk Pulmonary Embolism: A Meta-Analysis of 24,090 Patients.

We restate facts from the source record in our own words. The original wording belongs to its publisher.