ArticleAnnals of cardiothoracic surgery2014
Evolving strategies in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction-induced cardiogenic shock.
Article in Annals of cardiothoracic surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Advancements in 3D Printing and Bioprinting Methods for Cardiovascular Tissue Engineering.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Temporary support strategies for cardiogenic shock: extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, percutaneous ventricular assist devices and surgically placed extracorporeal ventricular assist devices.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2019Review
- 3D printing approaches for cardiac tissue engineering and role of immune modulation in tissue regeneration.International journal of nanomedicine · 2019Review
- Papillary muscle rupture after myocardial infarction during left ventricular assist device support.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2017Article
- Current Concepts and New Trends in the Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite advances in medical technology and re-vascularization interventions, the mortality rate for cardiogenic shock (CS) following acute myocardial infarction has remained at 50%. The majority of these mortalities are from left ventricular failure resulting in multi-system organ dysfunction. The field of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has evolved within the past decade, with improved outcomes from extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as well as continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF LVADs). In this paper, we discuss our institutional treatment strategies, the rationale for the protocol development, and our improved outcomes when using MCS in patients with refractory CS following acute myocardial infarction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.