ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024
Predictors of left ventricular ejection fraction in high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
PROTECT II: A Prospective, Multi-center, Randomized Controlled Trial of the IMPELLA RECOVER LP 2.5 System Versus Intra Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP)in Patients Undergoing Non Emergent High Risk PCI
Restore EF Observational Study (in High-risk PCI)
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing revascularization in the high-risk heart: Impella™-facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention in multivessel coronary artery disease with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and mitral regurgitation.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026Article
- Patient selection for complex, high-risk indicated percutaneous coronary intervention procedures: an overview.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026Article
- Contemporary evidence in protected percutaneous coronary intervention: a case-based review.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026Article
- Impella vs. IABP in Non-emergent High-Risk PCI: Outcomes and LVEF Recovery from a Large US EHR Study.Cardiology and therapy · 2026Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Elective High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Procedures.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- Mechanical Circulatory Support with Impella: Principles, Evidence, and Daily Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Revascularization completeness after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with improved long-term outcomes. Mechanical circulatory support [intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or Impella] is used during high-risk PCI (HR-PCI) to enhance peri-procedural safety and achieve more complete revascularization. The relationship between revascularization completeness [post-PCI residual SYNTAX Score (rSS)] and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in HR-PCI has not been established. We investigated LVEF predictors at 90 days post-PCI with Impella or IABP support. Individual patient data (IPD) were analyzed from PROTECT II (NCT00562016) in the base case. IPD from PROTECT II and RESTORE-EF (NCT04648306) were naïvely pooled in the sensitivity analysis. Using complete cases only, linear regression was used to explore the predictors of LVEF at 90 days post-PCI. Models were refined using stepwise selection based on Akaike Information Criterion and included: treatment group (Impella, IABP), baseline characteristics [age, gender, race, New York Heart Association Functional Classification, LVEF, SYNTAX Score (SS)], and rSS. Impella treatment and higher baseline LVEF were significant predictors of LVEF improvement at 90 days post-PCI (
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.