ArticleCureus2023
Severe Left Ventricular Failure Unmanageable by Impella 5.0.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mechanical circulatory support can be beneficial for patients with cardiogenic shock. Of these, the Impella has recently become the first-line device due to its feasibility, minimal invasiveness, and efficacy. We had a 58-year-old male with acute myocardial infarction followed by cardiogenic shock. We initially placed the patient on intra-aortic balloon pumping, which was switched to Impella 2.5 and could stabilize him. Unfortunately, the Impella 2.5 device suddenly stopped on the fifth day, thus, we tried to manage him by inotropes. However, his condition gradually deteriorated, so we applied Impella 5.0. Although his systemic circulation could be maintained, severe pulmonary hypertension persisted on Impella 5.0. He developed flash pulmonary edema, thus, we emergently added venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation on Impella 5.0 (ECPELLA). Then, we removed Impella 5.0 and changed peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to central venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. In this central venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, we inserted the cannulas in the pulmonary artery and the left ventricle in addition to the usual cannulas in the ascending aorta and the right atrium. We aimed to control pulmonary arterial blood flow for lung protection as well as left ventricular unloading by this modification. However, his cardiac function showed no signs of recovery, and his lung condition showed further exacerbation. He was complicated by fungal sepsis and finally died of multi-organ failure. Although the Impella is an option, it is crucial to evaluate patients' condition carefully and to escalate the device, if needed, without delay.
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.