ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions
Early Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Stress-Induced Cardiomyopathy Receiving Acute Mechanical Support in the US.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Takotsubo syndrome: pathophysiological insights and innovations in patient care.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2026Review
- In-Hospital Outcomes and 30-Day Readmission Rate After Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Liver Cirrhosis: A Contemporary Propensity-Matched Analysis.Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The role of acute mechanical circulatory support (aMCS) in patients with stress-induced cardiomyopathy (SIC) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) is not well studied. Here, we describe the incidence and outcomes of aMCS use in SIC-CS using a large national database. Methods: Using the Nationwide Readmissions Database from January 2016 to November 2019, we identified patients hospitalized with SIC who received isolated intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), microaxial flow pump (Impella, Abiomed), or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) during the index hospitalization. Results: A total of 902 among 94,709 hospitalizations for SIC (1.0%) required aMCS during the index hospitalization: 611 had IABP (67.7%), 189 had Impella (21.0%) and 102 had ECMO (11.3%). Patients with ECMO or Impella had higher in-hospital mortality rates than those with IABP (37.3% vs 29.1% vs 18.5%, respectively). There was an increased adjusted risk of in-hospital death with Impella (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.98; 95% CI, 1.12-3.49) and ECMO (aOR, 4.15; 95% CI, 1.85-9.32) vs IABP. Impella was associated with an increased adjusted risk of 30-day readmission compared to IABP (aOR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.16-5.51). Patients with ECMO or Impella had a higher incidence of renal replacement therapy and vascular/bleeding complications compared to those who received IABP. Conclusions: In this nationwide analysis using an administrative database, patients who received ECMO and Impella showed higher rates of in-hospital mortality, renal replacement therapy, and vascular/bleeding complications compared to those who received IABP. Patients with more comorbidities may receive more aggressive hemodynamic support which may account for observed mortality differences. Future prospective studies with objective and universal characterization of baseline clinical and hemodynamic characteristics of patients with CS secondary to SIC are needed.
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.