ReviewCardiology and therapy2025
Left Ventricular Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices for Cardiogenic Shock After Myocardial Infarction.
Review in Cardiology and therapy, 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.
- A Study Protocol on Risk Prediction Modelling of Mortality and In-Hospital Major Bleeding Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in an Australian Population: Machine Learning Approach.Methods and protocols · 2025Article
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Cardiogenic Shock: Current Evidence, Clinical Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiogenic shock is the most common cause of mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Historically, AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock was associated with in-hospital survival of only ~50%. Recent advances in mechanical circulatory support have allowed for improved survival rates compared with only conventional medical treatment. However, the management strategy for AMI-related cardiogenic shock remains largely empirical due to limited high-quality evidence-based studies. In this review, we provide an overview of the four types of left ventricular mechanical circulatory support currently available, review new guideline updates from the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association and European Society of Cardiology, and discuss recent and ongoing studies and registries in cardiogenic shock following AMI.
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.