Advances in Percutaneous Management of Pulmonary Embolism
International Journal of Angiology, ISSN: 1615-5939, Vol: 31, Issue: 3, Page: 203-212
2022
- 6Citations
- 11Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations6
- Citation Indexes6
- Captures11
- Readers11
- 11
Article Description
Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Systemic anticoagulation remains the recommended treatment for low-risk PE. Systemic thrombolysis is the recommended treatment for PE with hemodynamic compromise (massive/high-risk PE). A significant number of patients are not candidates for systemic thrombolysis due to the bleeding risk associated with thrombolytics. Historically, surgical pulmonary embolectomy (SPE) was recommended for massive PE with hemodynamic compromise for these patients. In the last decade, catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) has largely replaced SPE in the patient population with intermediate risk PE (submassive), defined as right heart strain (as evidenced by right ventricle enlargement on echocardiogram and/or computed tomography, usually along with elevation of troponin or B-type natriuretic peptide). Use of CDT increased in the last few years due to high incidence of PE in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia, and the use of mechanical thrombectomy (initially reserved for those with contraindications to thrombolysis) has also grown. In this article, we discuss the value of the PE response team, our approach to management of submassive (intermediate risk) and massive (high risk) PE with systemic thrombolytics, CDT, mechanical thrombectomy, and surgical embolectomy.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85137726760&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1756174; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36157096; http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0042-1756174; https://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1756174; https://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-0042-1756174
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know