ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting with temporary left ventricular assist device support.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Impella 5.5 is a temporary mechanical circulatory support device consisting of a microaxial pump that unloads the left ventricle and provides hemodynamic support, but data in bypass grafting (CABG) are limited. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective case series of adult patients who underwent isolated CABG with perioperative Impella 5.5 support between July 2020 and May 2024. Perioperative support was defined as implantation before separation from cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) or immediately after CPB wean. Patients with prior mechanical circulatory support, preoperative Impella as the primary indication, or concomitant/reoperative cardiac surgery were excluded. Clinical characteristics, procedural details, and early outcomes were obtained from the electronic medical record. Results: Sixteen patients met inclusion criteria. Median age was 59 years (range: 51-90 years), 93.8% were male, and 75.0% self-identified as White. Median preoperative LVEF was 20.5% (IQR: 15-25). Median Impella support duration was 6.97 days (IQR: 3.7-20.3 days). The device was implanted before CPB separation in 8 patients (50.0%) and immediately after CPB wean in 8 (50.0%); 93.8% were implanted via a right axillary graft. Thirteen patients (81.3%) were successfully weaned, and 1 patient (6.3%) was bridged to HeartMate 3. Two patients (12.5%) died before device explantation, and 1 additional patient died later during the same hospitalization after explantation, yielding an overall in-hospital mortality of 3 patients (18.8%). Rhythm complications occurred in 9 patients (56.3%), most commonly rapid atrial fibrillation (31.3%); sustained ventricular tachycardia occurred in 2 (12.5%), with 1 death. One intrapump thrombus required device exchange; no major bleeding or access-site infections occurred. Conclusion: Impella 5.5 support in high-risk CABG with LV dysfunction was feasible in selected patients and may serve as an adjunct to surgical revascularization.
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.