Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Catheter-based interventions (CBI) have yielded promising data in selected patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Despite growing clinical use, high-quality comparative evidence on the efficacy and safety of CBI, especially in relation to standard anticoagulation or systemic thrombolysis, is limited. As new randomized controlled trials (RCTs) rapidly accumulate, this living evidence synthesis will aim to systematically and continuously evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of reperfusion strategies vs standard of care in patients with high- and intermediate-risk acute PE.
METHODS: This living systematic review and meta-analysis will include RCTs comparing reperfusion strategies to standard of care in adult patients with high- or intermediate-risk PE. The primary analysis will pertain to trials that are powered and designed to assess hard clinical outcomes, such as death and hemodynamic deterioration. A secondary analysis will include additional studies reporting clinical outcomes, including those primarily evaluating hemodynamic or surrogate outcomes. Analyses will be stratified by PE severity (high- and intermediate-risk) and also conducted using a frequentist network meta-analysis framework. The review is ongoing, with new eligible trials added prospectively.
RESULTS: As of the initial search on 28 May 2025, 23 RCTs are included. Thirteen additional ongoing trials were identified for future inclusion, including trials with clinical outcomes such as PEITHO-3, HI-PEITHO, PEERLESS II, PE-TRACT, and PRAGUE-26 for intermediate-risk PE, and CATCH-PE II, PERSEVERE, and TORPEDONL for high-risk PE.
CONCLUSION: This living meta-analysis will offer continuously updated, comparative evidence on reperfusion strategies for acute PE, with a focus on informing the role of catheter-based interventions in clinical decision-making.
REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD420251207053. Available from https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251207053.