Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33346366›Full record

ArticleCardiology journal2022

Can we have a rationalized selection of intra-aortic balloon pump, Impella, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the catheterization laboratory?

Giulio Russo, Francesco Burzotta, Cristina Aurigemma, Daniela Pedicino, Enrico Romagnoli, Carlo Trani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
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

6 authors.

Giulio RussoFondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCSS, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6302-0135
Francesco BurzottaFondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCSS, Rome, Italy. francescoburzotta@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-6569-9401
Cristina AurigemmaFondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCSS, Rome, Italy.
Daniela PedicinoFondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCSS, Rome, Italy.
Enrico RomagnoliFondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCSS, Rome, Italy.
Carlo TraniFondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCSS, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiac assistance represents an emerging issue in cardiovascular medicine. The evolution of invasive cardiology techniques is making the catheterization laboratory one of the main hospital sites where implantation of percutaneous ventricular assistance devices (PVADs) is discussed and performed. Among available PVADs, intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), Impella, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are the most popular and offer completely different levels and ways to assist critical patients. The main settings calling for PVAD consideration in the catheterization laboratory are clinically indicated high-risk patients (CHIP) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and patients with cardiogenic shock or refractory cardiac arrest. In CHIP, PVAD serves the purpose of preventing hemodynamic collapse during PCI. This may also allow more extensive revascularizations and higher quality revascularization plans (imaging use, debulking, stent result optimization). IABP or Impella are more commonly selected whereas ECMO is seldom considered as a third option for highly selected patients. The "elective" nature of CHIP-PCI should allow careful procedure planning (peripheral artery disease assessment, access site selection and management) in order to minimize vascular/bleeding complications. Cardiogenic shock is still associated with high mortality rates, and PVAD theoretically offers further recovery chances. The lack of benefit observed with systematic IABP use is currently prompting consideration of the roles of Impella and ECMO. Prolonged assistance is often needed. Thus, team decisions and shared protocols for PVAD selection have to be promoted, taking into consideration available resources and operators' skills. In this paper, we critically review the available data in the field and highlight the possible decisionmaking hubs that catheterization-laboratory teams may consider in order to rationalize PVAD selection.

Indexed as

Extracorporeal Membrane OxygenationHeart-Assist DevicesPercutaneous Coronary InterventionCatheterizationHumansIntra-Aortic Balloon PumpingShock, CardiogenicTreatment Outcomeextracorporeal membrane oxygenationImpellaintra-aortic balloon pumppercutaneous ventricular assist devicepersonalized medicine

Identifiers

PMID33346366
PMCPMC8890424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.