ArticleCardiovascular intervention and therapeutics2026
Impella in killip class IV acute myocardial infarction complicated by pulseless ventricular arrhythmia.
Article in Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mortality in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock remains high, particularly when accompanied by pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF). The Impella device, a percutaneous mechanical circulatory support system that unloads the left ventricle, is increasingly used in AMI with shock. However, its impact on outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock complicated by pulseless VT/VF remains unclear. We retrospectively analyzed Killip class IV AMI patients who developed pulseless VT/VF, using data from the Tokyo CCU Network registry (January 2019–December 2022). The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Outcomes in patients treated with Impella were compared with those without Impella using propensity score matching. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality. Among 18,310 AMI patients, 1,986 were classified as Killip IV, of whom 715 developed pulseless VT/VF. Crude 30-day mortality did not differ significantly between the Impella and non-Impella groups (33.6% vs. 38.8%, p = 0.28). After propensity score matching, mortality was significantly lower in the Impella group (33.9% vs. 48.8%, p = 0.019). Multivariate analysis confirmed Impella use as an independent predictor of reduced mortality (odds ratio 0.32, 95% CI 0.19–0.56, p < 0.0001). Deaths due to VT/VF were less frequent in the Impella group (0.82% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.0030). In Killip IV AMI patients complicated by pulseless VT/VF, Impella use was associated with significantly lower 30-day mortality. These findings support early consideration of Impella in this high-risk population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41904306What 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.