ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024
Mechanical Circulatory Support Strategies in Takotsubo Syndrome with Cardiogenic Shock: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Challenges in Takotsubo Syndrome: Bridging Mimics, Mechanisms, and Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Takotsubo Syndrome in 2025: Evolving Concepts in Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Long-Term Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Balancing thrombosis and hemorrhage: anticoagulation-free VA-ECMO with a multidisciplinary strategy for cerebellar hemorrhage complicated by takotsubo syndrome.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Validation of Takotsubo Syndrome Scoring System.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- High Profile Transvalvular Pump Assisted Recovery for Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy: A Case Series.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The application of mechanical circulatory support in special conditions.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Article
- Pheochromocytoma Multisystem Crisis Requiring Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Takotsubo Syndrome and Gender Differences: Exploring Pathophysiological Mechanisms and Clinical Differences for a Personalized Approach in Patient Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Perioperative management of Takotsubo cardiomyopathy: an overview.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2024Review
- Effects of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement on Concurrent Aortic Valve Disease With Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTakotsubo syndrome is, by definition, a reversible form of acute heart failure. If cardiac output is severely reduced, Takotsubo syndrome can cause cardiogenic shock, and mechanical circulatory support can serve as a bridge to recovery. To date, there are no recommendations on when to use mechanical circulatory support and on which device is particularly effective in this context. Our aim was to determine the best treatment strategy.
methodsA systematic literature research and analysis of individual patient data was performed in MEDLINE/PubMed according to PRISMA guidelines. Our research considered original works published until 31 July 2023.
resultsA total of 93 publications that met the inclusion criteria were identified, providing individual data from 124 patients. Of these, 62 (50%) were treated with veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (va-ECLS), and 44 (35.5%) received a microaxial left ventricular assist device (Impella). Eighteen patients received an Impella CP and twenty-one an Impella 2.5. An intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) without other devices was used in only 13 patients (10.5%), while other devices (BiVAD or Tandem Heart) were used in 5 patients (4%). The median initial left ventricular ejection fraction was 20%, with no difference between the four device groups except for the IABP group, which was less affected by cardiac output failure (
conclusionsThough the Impella treatment is new, our analysis may show a significant benefit of Impella compared to other MCS strategies for cardiogenic shock in Takotsubo syndrome.
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.