Observational studyAnnals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia2024
Impact of Impella Support on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Postcardiotomy Cardiogenic Shock.
Observational study in Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced Hemocompatibility via Bivalirudin and Bicarbonate as Alternative to Heparin in a Catheter-Based Axial-Flow System.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- Microaxial pump-supported coronary surgery without CPB to optimize outcome in severely impaired left ventricles.ESC heart failure · 2025Article
- Current insights on temporary mechanical circulatory support in adults with post-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Article
- Trajectories following Impella 5.5 support are associated with initial presentation acuity.Artificial organs · 2025Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to elucidate the strategy of an effective Impella support for better clinical outcomes in patients with a postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCCS).
methodsThis single-center retrospective observational study enrolled 31 patients with PCCS undergoing an elective open-heart surgery followed by Impella support between November 2018 and February 2022 for further analysis.
resultsThe preoperative Euroscore II and left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction were 9.1 ± 10.4 and 35.7% ± 12.6%, respectively. The in-hospital mortality rate was 51.6% (n = 16). In survivors (n = 15), the mean Impella support time was 6.9 ± 3.5 days. Patients were discharged on the postoperative day 24.9 ± 16.4. Regarding LV remodeling, LV end-diastolic diameter was significantly decreased after Impella support (59.2 ± 6.0 mm vs. 54.4 ± 4.7 mm, p = 0.01, preoperative vs. postoperative). In-hospital mortality rates were comparable with small (CP, n = 6) or large (5.0, n = 25) Impella systems (33.3% [n = 2] vs. 56.0% [n = 14], p = 0.39). However, a lower in-hospital mortality rate was observed in the group with early initiation (i.e., intraoperative) of Impella support (n = 14) than that with delayed Impella initiation (i.e., in the postoperative course) (n = 11) (28.6% [n = 4] vs. 90.9% [n = 10], p = 0.004).
conclusionsImpella support contributes to LV remodeling in PCCS patients. In-hospital mortality was comparable in different Impella sizes and lower in early Impella initiation.
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.