ReviewCardiac failure review2022
Pulmonary Artery Catheter Monitoring in Patients with Cardiogenic Shock: Time for a Reappraisal?
Review in Cardiac failure review, 2022. 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 11 papers.
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.
The Role of Swan-Ganz Catheter in Hemodynamic Resuscitation for Patients With Cardiogenic Shock
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Disparities in the management of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: a questionnaire survey in Beijing.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Postinfarction Ventricular Septal Defect Despite Preserved Left Ventricular Function: Management Challenges and Procedural Complications.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- FEM-based volume estimation using electrode catheter measurements.Journal of electrical bioimpedance · 2026Article
- Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Cardiogenic Shock: A Narrative Review in Light of Recent Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Management of cardiogenic shock: state-of-the-art.Intensive care medicine · 2024Review
- Sepsis Management in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
- Prevention and management of critical care complications in cardiogenic shock: a narrative review.Journal of intensive care · 2023Review
- Review article: Practical considerations for fluid resuscitation in cirrhosis.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2023Review
- Lactate versus Phosphate as Biomarkers to Aid Mechanical Circulatory Support Decisions in Patients with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest and Return of Spontaneous Circulation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Left Ventricular Unloading in Acute on Chronic Heart Failure: From Statements to Clinical Practice.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and intervention Stage-B cardiogenic shock: An interventional-heart failure-critical care conundrum.IHJ cardiovascular case reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiogenic shock represents one of the most dramatic scenarios to deal with in intensive cardiology care and is burdened by substantial short-term mortality. An integrated approach, including timely diagnosis and phenotyping, along with a well-established shock team and management protocol, may improve survival. The use of the Swan-Ganz catheter could play a pivotal role in various phases of cardiogenic shock management, encompassing diagnosis and haemodynamic characterisation to treatment selection, titration and weaning. Moreover, it is essential in the evaluation of patients who might be candidates for long-term heart-replacement strategies. This review provides a historical background on the use of the Swan-Ganz catheter in the intensive care unit and an analysis of the available evidence in terms of potential prognostic implications in this setting.
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.