Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38606380›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024

Acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock in Ukraine: multicentre registry analysis 2021-2022.

Anton O Bilchenko, Olga V Gritsenko, Volodymir O Kolisnyk, Oleg I Rafalyuk, Andrii V Pyzhevskii, Yaroslav V Myzak, Dmytro I Besh, Victor M Salo, Sergii O Chaichuk, Mykhailo O Lehoida and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

12 authors.

Anton O Bilchenko *Department of Prevention and Treatment of Emergency Conditions, L.T. Malaya Therapy National Institute of the National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine.
Olga V Gritsenko *Department of Interventional Cardiology, V.T. Zaitcev Institute of General and Urgent Surgery of the National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine.
Volodymir O KolisnykDepartment of Interventional Cardiology, Odesa Regional Hospital, Odesa, Ukraine.
Oleg I RafalyukDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Lviv Regional Clinical Treatment and Diagnostic Cardiology Center, Lviv, Ukraine.
Andrii V PyzhevskiiDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Lviv Regional Clinical Treatment and Diagnostic Cardiology Center, Lviv, Ukraine.
Yaroslav V MyzakDepartment of Interventional Radiology, 1st Territorial Medical Union, Lviv, Ukraine.
Dmytro I BeshDepartment of Interventional Radiology, 1st Territorial Medical Union, Lviv, Ukraine.
Victor M SaloDepartment of Interventional Radiology, 1st Territorial Medical Union, Lviv, Ukraine.
Sergii O ChaichukDepartment of Interventional Cardiology, Oleksandrivska Clinical Hospital, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Mykhailo O LehoidaDepartment of Cardiology, Vinnytsia Regional Clinical Treatment and Diagnostic Center of Cardiovascular Pathology, Vinnytsia, Ukraine.
Ihor V DanylchukDepartment of Cardiology, Vinnytsia Regional Clinical Treatment and Diagnostic Center of Cardiovascular Pathology, Vinnytsia, Ukraine.
Ihor V PolivenokDepartment of Interventional Cardiology, V.T. Zaitcev Institute of General and Urgent Surgery of the National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Data on the results and management strategies in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) in the Low and Lower-Middle Income Countries (LLMICs) are limited. This lack of understanding of the situation partially hinders the development of effective cardiogenic shock treatment programs in this part of the world. Materials and methods: The Ukrainian Multicentre Cardiogenic Shock Registry was analyzed, covering patient data from 2021 to 2022 in 6 major Ukrainian reperfusion centres from different parts of the country. Analysis was focusing on outcomes, therapeutic modalities and mortality predictors in AMI-CS patients. Results: We analyzed data from 221 consecutive patients with CS from 6 hospitals across Ukraine. The causes of CS were ST-elevated myocardial infarction (85.1%), non-ST-elevated myocardial infarction (5.9%), decompensated chronic heart failure (7.7%) and arrhythmia (1.3%), with a total in-hospital mortality rate for CS of 57.1%. The prevalence of CS was 6.3% of all AMI with reperfusion rate of 90.5% for AMI-CS. In 23.5% of cases, CS developed in the hospital after admission. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) utilization was 19.9% using intra-aortic balloon pump alone. Left main stem occlusion, reperfusion deterioration, Charlson Comorbidity Index >4, and cardiac arrest were found to be independent predictors for hospital mortality in AMI-СS. Conclusions: Despite the wide adoption of primary percutaneous coronary intervention as the main reperfusion strategy for AMI, СS remains a significant problem in LLMICs, associated with high in-hospital mortality. There is an unmet need for the development and implementation of a nationwide protocol for CS management and the creation of reference CS centers based on the country-wide reperfusion network, equipped with modern technologies for MCS.

Indexed as

acute myocardial infarctioncardiogenic shockclinical outcomesmechanical circulatory supportmortality risk factors

Identifiers

PMID38606380
PMCPMC11007039

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.