Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34405356›Full record

SynthesisCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2021

Pulmonary artery catheterization in patients with cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Justin Y Chow, Maria E Vadakken, Richard P Whitlock, Alex Koziarz, Craig Ainsworth, Faizan Amin, William F McIntyre, Catherine Demers, Emilie P Belley-Côté

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07062744 (The Role of Swan-Ganz Catheter in Hemodynamic Resuscitation for Patients With Cardiogenic Shock), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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.

NCT07062744 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

The Role of Swan-Ganz Catheter in Hemodynamic Resuscitation for Patients With Cardiogenic Shock

TypeinterventionalSponsorBach Mai HospitalRan2025 to 2027Enrolled108ConditionsCardiogenic Shock, Pulmonary Artery Catheter Waveform Interpretation, Hemodynamic Management, Hemodynamic OptimizationArmsSwan-Ganz IQ Pulmonary Arterial catheter, Swan-Ganz IQ catheter
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The pulmonary artery catheter: a solution still looking for a problem.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Justin Y ChowDepartment of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Maria E VadakkenPopulation Health Research Institute, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Richard P WhitlockPopulation Health Research Institute, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Alex KoziarzDepartment of Health Research, Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Craig AinsworthDepartment of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Faizan AminDepartment of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
William F McIntyreDepartment of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Catherine DemersDepartment of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Emilie P Belley-CôtéDepartment of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. ebelleycote@me.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5071-076X
McMaster University · CAPopulation Health Research Institute · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCardiogenic shock carries high morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this review was to determine the safety and efficacy of pulmonary artery catheterization (PAC) in adult patients hospitalized with cardiogenic shock. SOURCE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials comparing PAC vs no PAC in cardiogenic shock. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and grey literature. We screened articles, abstracted data, and evaluated risk of bias in duplicate. We pooled data using a random-effects model and evaluated the quality of evidence using the GRADE framework. Outcomes of interest were mortality, length of stay, and procedural complications. PRINCIPAL

findingsWe identified 19 eligible observational studies (≥ 2,716,287 patients) and no randomized controlled trials; 14 studies were at high risk of bias (lack of adjustment for prognostic variables and/or co-interventions). When pooling adjusted results, PAC was associated with improved survival to hospital discharge (relative risk [RR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.91, I

conclusionsVery low-quality observational evidence suggests PAC use in patients with cardiogenic shock is associated with lower mortality. Overall, these results support consideration of PAC for hemodynamic assessment in cardiogenic shock. Prospective randomized clinical trials are needed to further characterize the role of PAC in this population.

Indexed as

Catheterization, Swan-GanzShock, CardiogenicAdultHemodynamicsHumansProspective Studiesacute heart failureCardiogenic shockhemodynamic assessmentmeta-analysispulmonary artery catheterizationright heart catheterization

Identifiers

PMID34405356
OpenAlexW3193722743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.