ArticleEuropean heart journal2026
DanGer shock criteria and outcomes in acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock treated with Impella: the J-PVAD registry.
Article in European heart journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impella Support as a "Bridge to Nowhere": Ethical and Clinical Considerations for End-of-Life Care After Acute Myocardial Infarction.Circulation reports · 2026Article
- Axial Flow Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices: Physiology, Procedural Considerations, and Clinical Applications-A State-of-the-Art Review.Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team · 2026Review
- Association between lactate to albumin ratio and 28-day all-cause mortality in patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a retrospective multi-cohort study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThe DanGer shock trial showed a survival benefit of Impella in highly selected patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS). In real-world settings, however, Impella is often used in broader populations not meeting trial criteria. This study aimed to assess the distribution and outcomes of DanGer shock-eligible and -ineligible acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) patients in a nationwide Japanese registry.
methodsA total of 3975 AMI-CS patients treated with Impella between 2020 and 2023 were identified from the J-PVAD registry. Patients were stratified into five groups: eligible STEMI-CS, non-eligible STEMI-CS, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), mechanical complications (MCs), and non-STEMI-CS (NSTEMI-CS). Eligible STEMI-CS was defined as STEMI-CS fulfilling all of the following: lactate ≥ 2.5 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure <100 mmHg or catecholamine use, left ventricular ejection fraction <45%, and shock onset to first Impella support ≤24 h. Thirty-day mortality, associated risk factors, and complications were examined across the five groups.
resultsEligible STEMI-CS accounted for 35.6% of all AMI-CS cases, with a 30-day mortality of 37.6%. Non-eligible STEMI-CS patients had lower mortality (27.6%), but it increased significantly with advanced age, renal dysfunction, veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use, ventricular arrhythmia, or sepsis. Thirty-day mortality was 51.3% in OHCA (63.4% without return of spontaneous circulation), 39.8% in MC, and 33.3% in NSTEMI-CS groups.
conclusionsIn this nationwide registry, one-third of AMI-CS patients treated with Impella met DanGer shock criteria. Outcomes in non-eligible subgroups were heterogeneous, highlighting the importance of individualized risk assessment in guiding Impella use in real-world practice.
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.