Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42032454›Full record

ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2026

Initial intra-aortic balloon pump versus Impella support strategies and short-term outcomes in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a MIMIC-IV cohort study.

Hao Li, Yuke Ma, Yang Su

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Hao LiDepartment of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University, Jining, China.
Yuke MaDepartment of Neurology, The Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Yang SuDepartment of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University, Jining, China. 332146241@qq.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComparative evidence to guide the initial choice of temporary mechanical circulatory support in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock remains limited, particularly in real-world intensive care settings. We compared short-term outcomes associated with an initial intra-aortic balloon pump strategy versus an initial Impella strategy using the MIMIC-IV database.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using adult first intensive care unit stays in MIMIC-IV. Acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock were identified using ICD-based definitions, and the complete code list is provided in Supplementary Table S1. Adults with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock who received mechanical circulatory support within 24 h after first intensive care unit admission were screened. The exposure of interest was the earliest documented device within that 24-hour window. Patients whose initial device was an intra-aortic balloon pump or Impella were included in the primary analysis, whereas those with initial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were excluded from the main comparison. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The primary analysis used propensity score overlap weighting with an expanded model incorporating calendar era, pre-device clinical severity variables, PCI status, and time from intensive care unit admission to device initiation. Prespecified sensitivity analyses included doubly robust logistic regression, a weighted log-link model, a single-device cohort sensitivity analysis, exclusion of patients with pre-intensive care unit device documentation, multiple imputation, and complete-case analysis.

resultsAmong 85,242 adult first intensive care unit stays, 6,678 met the acute myocardial infarction definition and 1,007 met the acute myocardial infarction plus cardiogenic shock definition. Of these, 443 patients had any mechanical circulatory support documented during the hospitalization, and 395 had mechanical circulatory support within 24 h after first intensive care unit admission. After excluding 10 patients with initial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, the final primary cohort included 385 patients, of whom 313 received an initial intra-aortic balloon pump and 72 received an initial Impella. The median time from intensive care unit admission to device initiation was 0.80 h in the intra-aortic balloon pump group and 0.97 h in the Impella group. Crude in-hospital mortality was 29.4% in the intra-aortic balloon pump group and 58.3% in the Impella group. Initial Impella remained associated with higher in-hospital mortality in the overlap-weighted model (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.58–5.30; P = 0.001), doubly robust model (OR 4.15, 95% CI 2.05–8.39; P < 0.001), weighted log-link model (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.31–2.48; P < 0.001), single-device cohort sensitivity analysis (OR 3.41, 95% CI 1.74–6.68; P < 0.001), and exclusion of patients with pre-intensive care unit device documentation (OR 2.59, 95% CI 1.40–4.78; P = 0.003). Multiple-imputation analyses were directionally consistent.

conclusionsIn this single-center critical care cohort, an initial Impella strategy was associated with higher in-hospital mortality than an initial intra-aortic balloon pump strategy among adults with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock who received mechanical circulatory support within 24 h after first intensive care unit admission. These findings should be interpreted cautiously because residual confounding and treatment-selection bias cannot be excluded in this observational study.

Indexed as

Heart-Assist DevicesIntra-Aortic Balloon PumpingMyocardial InfarctionShock, CardiogenicAgedDatabases, FactualFemaleHospital MortalityHumansMaleMiddle AgedRecovery of FunctionRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAcute myocardial infarctionCardiogenic shockImpellaIntra-aortic balloon pumpMechanical circulatory supportMIMIC-IV

Identifiers

PMID42032454
PMCPMC13262071

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.