Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34999807›Full record

ArticleInteractive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2022

Left ventricular unloading during extracorporeal life support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock: surgical venting versus Impella device.

Darko Radakovic, Armin Zittermann, Alen Knezevic, Artyom Razumov, Dragan Opacic, Nicole Wienrautner, Christian Flottmann, Sebastian V Rojas, Henrik Fox, René Schramm and 4 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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.

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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Darko RadakovicClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3380-0747
Armin ZittermannClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6085-6554
Alen KnezevicClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.
Artyom RazumovClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.
Dragan OpacicClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.
Nicole WienrautnerClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.
Christian FlottmannClinic for General and Interventional Cardiology/Angiology, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.
Sebastian V RojasClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.
Henrik FoxClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2187-8715
René SchrammClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5803-3575
Michiel MorshuisClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6178-5791
Volker RudolphClinic for General and Interventional Cardiology/Angiology, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5385-6839
Jan GummertClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6956-9110
Marcus-André DeutschClinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5928-8737
Heart and Diabetes Center North Rhine-Westphalia · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPatients in cardiogenic shock supported with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) may experience severe complications from reduced left ventricular (LV) unloading and increased cardiac afterload. These effects are usually modified by adding a percutaneous direct Impella vent or surgical LV vent on top of VA-ECMO in selected patients. However, direct comparisons between 2 LV unloading strategies in patients with cardiogenic shock due to myocardial infarction are lacking. Therefore, we sought to investigate the impact of these 2 different approaches.

methodsWe enrolled 112 patients treated with an Impella or surgical LV vent during VA-ECMO support between January 2014 and February 2020. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints included rates of myocardial recovery or transition to durable mechanical circulatory support. Additionally, we assessed adverse events such as peripheral ischaemic complications requiring intervention, sepsis and ischaemic stroke.

resultsAt 30 days, 38 patients in the Impella group (54%) and 26 patients in the surgical LV vent group (63%) had died (relative risk with Impella 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.47-1.30; P = 0.35). Impella group and the surgical LV vent group differed significantly with respect to the secondary end points including rates of myocardial recovery (24% and 7%, respectively; P = 0.022) and rates of durable mechanical circulatory support (17% and 42%, P = 0.012). Complication rates were not statistically different between the 2 groups.

conclusionsThe use of Impella device as therapeutic unloading therapy during VA-ECMO did not significantly reduce 30-day mortality compared to surgical LV vent in patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction.

Indexed as

Extracorporeal Membrane OxygenationHeart-Assist DevicesMyocardial InfarctionShock, CardiogenicBrain IschemiaHumansStrokeCardiogenic shockLeft ventricular unloadingVenoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Identifiers

PMID34999807
PMCPMC8923515
OpenAlexW3193396491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.