SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2022
Mortality in cardiogenic shock patients receiving mechanical circulatory support: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score-matched studies.Intensive care medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of the Efficacy of ECMO With or Without IABP in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Head-to-head comparison of V-A ECMO, Impella and ECPELLA in normal ovine hearts.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Intra-aortic balloon pump is associated with the lowest whereas Impella with the highest inpatient mortality and complications regardless of severity or hospital types.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2024Article
- In Patients with Cardiogenic Shock, Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Is Associated with Very High All-Cause Inpatient Mortality Rate.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- The Use of Cardioprotective Devices and Strategies in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Procedures and Cardiac Surgery.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices are widely used for cardiogenic shock (CS). This network meta-analysis aims to evaluate which MCS strategy offers advantages.
methodsA systemic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed. Studies included double-blind, randomized controlled, and observational trials, with 30-day follow-ups. Paired independent researchers conducted the screening, data extraction, quality assessment, and consistency and heterogeneity assessment.
resultsWe included 39 studies (1 report). No significant difference in 30-day mortality was noted between venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) and VA-ECMO plus Impella, Impella, and medical therapy. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, the optimal ranking of the interventions was surgical venting plus VA-ECMO, medical therapy, VA-ECMO plus Impella, intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), Impella, Tandem Heart, VA-ECMO, and Impella plus IABP. Regarding in-hospital mortality and 30-day mortality, the forest plot showed low heterogeneity. The results of the node-splitting approach showed that direct and indirect comparisons had a relatively high consistency.
conclusionsIABP more effectively reduce the incidence of 30-day mortality compared with VA-ECMO and Impella for the treatment of CS.
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.