Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41039160›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cardiology2026

Takotsubo syndrome: pathophysiological insights and innovations in patient care.

Elmir Omerovic, Björn Redfors

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
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

2 authors.

Elmir OmerovicDepartment of Cardiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden. elmir@wlab.gu.se.ORCID 0000-0002-3875-8621
Björn RedforsDepartment of Cardiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Takotsubo syndrome, also known as broken heart syndrome, was first described in Japan in the 1990s and presents as acute heart failure caused by transient contractile dysfunction that mimics acute coronary syndrome but is not caused by acute coronary obstruction. Takotsubo syndrome accounts for as much as 2-3% of suspected coronary syndromes and is considerably more common in women than in men. In this Review, we discuss the historical background and clinical features of Takotsubo syndrome and our evolving understanding of its pathophysiology. The hallmark feature of Takotsubo syndrome is transient left ventricular dysfunction linked to emotional or physical stressors. Despite advances in our understanding of the clinical presentation and possible pathophysiological mechanisms of Takotsubo syndrome, this condition continues to challenge our fundamental understanding of human anatomy and physiology, particularly regarding how acute emotional and physical stressors can trigger such profound cardiovascular dysfunction. Although the definitive mechanisms remain elusive, current hypotheses largely centre on catecholamine surges and sympathetic nervous system hyperactivation. Diagnostic criteria have been developed by the Mayo Clinic and European Society of Cardiology working groups but, in the absence of randomized controlled clinical trials, no specific treatments for Takotsubo syndrome are available. In this Review, we highlight the complex pathophysiology of Takotsubo syndrome, with an emphasis on the interplay between emotional stress and cardiac health, and call for the development of evidence-based management protocols.

Indexed as

Takotsubo CardiomyopathyFemaleHumansPrognosisStress, Psychological

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.