Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36741852›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022

Meta-analysis of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in combination with intra-aortic balloon pump vs. extracorporeal membrane oxygenation only in patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction.

Max M Meertens, Tobias Tichelbäcker, Sascha Macherey-Meyer, Sebastian Heyne, Simon Braumann, Stephan F Nießen, Stephan Baldus, Christoph Adler, Samuel Lee

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. National Heart Center Perfusion Guidelines.Saudi medical journal · 2026
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Max M MeertensFaculty of Medicine, Clinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Tobias TichelbäckerFaculty of Medicine, Clinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Sascha Macherey-MeyerFaculty of Medicine, Clinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Sebastian HeyneFaculty of Medicine, Clinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Simon BraumannFaculty of Medicine, Clinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Stephan F NießenFaculty of Medicine, Clinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Stephan BaldusFaculty of Medicine, Clinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Christoph AdlerFaculty of Medicine, Clinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Samuel LeeFaculty of Medicine, Clinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
University Hospital Cologne · DEUniversity of Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Incidence and mortality of cardiogenic shock (CS) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain high despite substantial therapy improvements in acute percutaneous coronary intervention over the last decades. Unloading the left ventricle in patients with Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) can be performed by using an intra-aortic balloon pumps' (IABP) afterload reduction, which might be especially beneficial in AMI patients with CS. Objective: The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of VA-ECMO + IABP vs. VA-ECMO treatment on the mortality of patients with CS due to AMI. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using EMBASE, COCHRANE, and MEDLINE databases. Studies comparing the effect of VA-ECMO + IABP vs. VA-ECMO on mortality of patients with AMI were included. Meta-analyses were performed to analyze the effect of the chosen treatment on 30-day/in-hospital mortality. Results: Twelve studies were identified by the literature search, including a total of 5,063 patients, 81.5% were male and the mean age was 65.9 years. One thousand one hundred and thirty-six patients received treatment with VA-ECMO in combination with IABP and 2,964 patients received VA-ECMO treatment only. The performed meta-analysis showed decreased mortality at 30-days/in-hospital after VA-ECMO + IABP compared to VA-ECMO only for patients with cardiogenic shock after AMI (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.30-0.44, Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, combination therapy of VA-ECMO + IABP was superior to VA-ECMO only therapy in patients with CS due to AMI. In the absence of randomized data, these results are hypothesis generating only.

Indexed as

acute coronary syndrome (ACS)cardiogenic shockIABPmeta-analysisVA-ECMO

Identifiers

PMID36741852
PMCPMC9889933
OpenAlexW4317394887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.