ReviewStructural heart : the journal of the Heart Team2026
Axial Flow Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices: Physiology, Procedural Considerations, and Clinical Applications-A State-of-the-Art Review.
Review in Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team, 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.
- Contemporary evidence in protected percutaneous coronary intervention: a case-based review.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous microaxial flow pumps have become an important form of temporary mechanical circulatory support for patients with advanced cardiac dysfunction, particularly in cardiogenic shock and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. By actively unloading the ventricle, reducing end-diastolic pressure and myocardial oxygen demand, and supporting systemic and coronary perfusion, Impella devices offer distinct physiological advantages over passive support strategies. This state-of-the-art review summarizes the mechanisms of ventricular unloading, device characteristics, procedural considerations, monitoring requirements, complication management, and contemporary clinical applications of axial-flow percutaneous ventricular assist devices. Current evidence suggests that, in selected patients with infarct-related cardiogenic shock, early and protocolized Impella use may improve survival, although this benefit must be balanced against higher rates of bleeding, hemolysis, vascular injury, thrombosis, and device-related complications. In high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention, Impella may enhance procedural stability and facilitate more complete revascularization, but a definitive survival benefit remains unproven. Emerging applications include right ventricular support, biventricular support, postcardiotomy shock prevention, ventricular tachycardia ablation, and combined use with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Despite expanding use, major uncertainties remain regarding optimal timing, patient selection, standardized anticoagulation and weaning protocols, cost-effectiveness, and generalizability beyond infarct-related shock. Further randomized trials, registry-based analyses, and technological refinements are needed to define which patients benefit most while minimizing complications.
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.