Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31784052›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of cardiology2020

Trends, Outcomes, and Predictors of Revascularization in Cardiogenic Shock.

Muhammad Zia Khan, Muhammad Bilal Munir, Muhammad U Khan, Mohammed Osman, Pratik Agrawal, Moinuddin Syed, Yasir Abdul Ghaffar, Anas Alharbi, Safi U Khan, Sudarshan Balla

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Gut CommensalReviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Muhammad Zia KhanDepartment of Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia. Electronic address: Ziaulislam87@gmail.com.
Muhammad Bilal MunirDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, West Virginia University Heart & Vascular Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Muhammad U KhanDepartment of Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Mohammed OsmanDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, West Virginia University Heart & Vascular Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Pratik AgrawalDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, West Virginia University Heart & Vascular Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Moinuddin SyedDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, West Virginia University Heart & Vascular Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Yasir Abdul GhaffarDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, West Virginia University Heart & Vascular Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Anas AlharbiDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, West Virginia University Heart & Vascular Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Safi U KhanDepartment of Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Sudarshan BallaDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, West Virginia University Heart & Vascular Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia.

Funding

West Virginia IDEA-CTRU54GM104942 · NIGMS · WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY · PI Sally Lynn Hodder · 2012 to 2026
$81.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM104942
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiogenic shock (CS) carries high mortality and morbidity. Early revascularization is an important strategy in management of these patients. We sought to determine the outcomes and predictors of revascularization among patients with CS. Patients with CS and acute myocardial infarction were identified using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) data from January 2002 to December 2014 using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes. Subsequently, patients who underwent revascularization were then selected. A total of 118,618 patients with CS were identified. Out of these, about 55,735 (47%) patients underwent revascularization. Mean age of patients who underwent revascularization was lower when compared with patients not who underwent revascularization (66.40 vs 72.24 years, p < 0.01). Patients who underwent revascularization had lower mortality when compared with patients not who underwent revascularization (25.1% vs 52.2%, p < 0.01). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and mechanical circulatory support devices were often utilized more in patients who underwent revascularization. Overall, we found modest increased trend of revascularization over our study years with decline in mortality. Female gender, weekend admission, drug abuse, pulmonary hypertension, anemia, renal failure, neurological disorders, malignancy were associated with lower odds of revascularization. In conclusion, in this large nationally represented US population sample of CS patients, we found revascularization rate of about 47% with improvement in overall mortality over our study years.

Indexed as

AgedDual Anti-Platelet TherapyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHospital MortalityHumansMaleMyocardial InfarctionMyocardial RevascularizationPrognosisRetrospective StudiesShock, CardiogenicSurvival RateTime FactorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID31784052
PMCPMC7453955

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.