Table 3.

Main general reviews and meta-analyses on treatment options for pulmonary embolism.

Authors, year	Period covered by review	Aim and main points of the review	Number of studies included
Kuo et al, 2009 [35]	January 1990–September 2008	Non-comparative data meta-analysis Efficacy and safety of catheter-directed treatment for massive pulmonary embolism (thrombolysis, mechanical, aspiration, catheter-directed thrombolysis)	N = 35
Engelberger et al, 2014 [18]	ND	General review of efficacy and safety data on the use of ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis in acute pulmonary embolism. Pooled analysis (non-comparative data meta-analysis) of the data from the main studies	N = 7
Ierardi et al, 2015 [40]	January 2000–June 2015	General review of clinical experience worldwide with pharmacomechanical thrombolysis (AngioJet™)	N = 19
Bajaj et al, 2016 [39]	1966–September 2015	Meta-analysis of the use of catheters for acute pulmonary embolism	N = 62
Mostafa et al, 2016 [19]	2008–September 2015	Non-comparative data meta-analysis Efficacy and safety of ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis for acute pulmonary embolism	N = 11
Zarghouni et al, 2016 [41]	ND	General review of different catheter-directed methods to treat pulmonary embolism and results of the main studies in the literature according to the authors	N = 7

ND: not determined.