ArticleCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2019
Protected percutaneous coronary intervention with Impella CP in a patient with left main disease, severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction and established hemolysis.
Article in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2019. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Contemporary percutaneous management of coronary calcification: current status and future directions.Open heart · 2023Review
- Impella Support as a Bridge to Surgery for Severe Mitral Regurgitation With Cardiogenic Shock.Circulation reports · 2021Article
- Impact of the angle between aortic and mitral annulus on the occurrence of hemolysis during Impella support.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2020Article
- Advances in diagnosis and treatment of mechanical hemolysis following percutaneous interventional for valvular heart diseases.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of the Impella device in patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic impairment undergoing left main (LM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been growing exponentially. Data from observational studies and registries demonstrate that Impella-assisted high-risk PCI is safe and effective with a low rate of peri-procedural complications. Hemolysis is a potential limitation of virtually all mechanical circulatory support devices and a small incidence of hemolysis has been associated with Impella use. The safety and feasibility of Impella use in patients with established hemolysis has not been previously evaluated. We report the first described case in the literature of Impella-assisted left main stem (LMS) PCI in a patient with severe LV systolic dysfunction and autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA). Despite the patient's high bleeding risk (active hemolysis, thrombocytopenia, impaired renal function, use of steroids), Impella placement and PCI were successfully performed without complication. Haemoglobin, bilirubin and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels were closely monitored peri-procedurally with no evidence of exacerbation of the patient's hemolysis. We briefly discuss the mechanism of Impella-induced hemolysis and factors that can exacerbate hemolysis.
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.