ArticleHeart and vessels2025
Sex-specific outcomes in acute myocardial infarction-associated cardiogenic shock treated with and without V-A ECMO: a retrospective German nationwide analysis from 2014 to 2018.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2025. 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.
- Impact of right bundle branch block in anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in the contemporary primary PCI era.Heart and vessels · 2026Article
- Myocardial Scar and Cardiac Biomarker Levels as Predictors of Mortality After Acute Myocardial Infarction: A CMR-Based Long-Term Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Acute myocardial infarction-associated cardiogenic shock (AMICS) remains a condition with high mortality. Some patients require mechanical circulatory support (MCS) as their condition deteriorates. Sex-specific differences in risk factors and outcomes of cardiovascular disease have previously been described but are inconclusive regarding the use of MCS in AMICS. We aimed to investigate these with a focus on long-term outcomes. Health claim data from AOK - Die Gesundheitskasse (local health care funds) for patients hospitalized with AMICS between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2015, was descriptively analyzed. Then, a Cox proportional hazards model was used to adjust for confounders. We analyzed 10,023 patients, of which 477 (4.8%) were treated with veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO). In-hospital mortality was high, but similar between treatments (V-A ECMO 59.1%, no V-A ECMO 56.6%). Women had a higher median age (78.9 years, IQR 13.8 vs. 71.8 years, IQR 17.9; p < 0.001), a different cardiovascular risk profile and in the conservatively treated patients underwent revascularization less often (69.2% vs. 77.1%; p < 0.001) than men did. In a multivariate analysis, female sex was not associated with lower survival (HR 1.03, CI 0.98-1.09; p = 0.233). V-A ECMO, however, was associated with lower survival in both sexes. We observed a low overall survival in follow-up after three years (no V-A ECMO: men 28.9% vs. women 21.7%, V-A ECMO: men 18.2% vs. women 17.0%). In conclusion, women with AMICS presented with a different risk profile, especially a higher age, and underwent guideline-recommended therapies such as revascularization less often than men. Female sex, however, was not associated with lower survival in a multivariate analysis. In-hospital mortality was high, regardless of treatment, and V-A ECMO was associated with lower survival in follow-up.
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.