ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Mechanical Complications After Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Shock-Stage and Timing-Based Management Framework.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Functional hydrogels in cardiovascular therapy: Design, applications and clinical challenges (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mechanical complications after acute myocardial infarction (MI)-ventricular septal rupture (VSR), free-wall rupture (FWR), and papillary muscle rupture (PMR)-have become uncommon in the primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) era, yet remain among the most lethal cardiovascular emergencies, with contemporary mortality largely driven by cardiogenic shock and delays to definitive treatment. Although major society documents agree on urgent imaging, early mechanical circulatory support when shock is present, and multidisciplinary decision-making, important transatlantic differences persist, particularly regarding timing of intervention in ventricular septal rupture. This review synthesises current surgical and transcatheter evidence and proposes a unified, physiology-centred framework integrating shock staging, anatomical feasibility, and response to mechanical support. We also introduce STABLE, a structured bedside checklist designed to support consistent daily triage across all three lesions and to align timing decisions with haemodynamic stabilisation rather than centre-specific habit.
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.