ArticleCardiology and therapy2025
Impella Versus VA-ECMO for Patients with Cardiogenic Shock: Preliminary Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in the Italian Context.
Article in Cardiology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness of combined veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and Impella support (ECPELLA) in infarct-related cardiogenic shock.European heart journal open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCardiogenic shock (CS) is a life-threatening failure of the heart to supply adequate blood, requiring immediate treatment. Although nowadays Impella
methodsA Markov model projected, on a lifetime horizon, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs associated with Impella and VA-ECMO. Costs from the NHS perspective were estimated mainly through Italian reimbursement rates, while hospital costs were derived from a clinical center in Italy.
resultsFrom an NHS perspective, Impella showed lower costs and better life expectancy and patients' quality of life (€50,303, 1.544 LYs, 0.905 QALYs) compared to VA-ECMO (€76,795, 1.391 LYs, 0.784 QALYs). DRG overall reimbursements for Impella (€49,998) do not completely cover the hospital costs and the cost for the technology (€57,770). Conversely, the hospital cost for the strategy VA-ECMO (€52,190) is lower than the NHS overall reimbursements (€76,790).
conclusionsOur analysis suggests that Impella may be cost-saving over VA-ECMO, while also providing better health outcomes for patients with CS; however, discrepancies in costs and reimbursement rates were observed, likely due to variability in patient care and hospital resource utilization. Future real-world studies are needed to confirm these findings, but decision-makers can use this data as an initial reference for health technology assessments in Italy.
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.