ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Patterns of temporary mechanical circulatory support, escalation, de-escalation and outcomes in cardiogenic shock.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiogenic Shock can affect significantly the survival in patients with AMI or ADHF.Mechanical circulatory support is the keystone of treatment beyond standard care to improve end organ perfusion and potentially survival.Hemodynamics progression during support has not been well studied. This retrospective cohort study aims to evaluate the patterns, timingand outcomes of therapeutic circulatory support escalation and de-escalation in patients admitted to a tertiary referral cardiogenic shockcenter. Methods: Data were collected for the patients over the age of 18 that had implantation of the microaxial flow pump at the University of Iowa HealthCare. Data includes invasive hemodynamics during admission, 24 h and 72 h post intervention along different modalities ofmechanical and pharmacological hemodynamic support in addition to patient history and baseline characteristics. Results: A total of 110 patients were included in the analysis, 53 patients (48.18%) survived. The average Impella power level was significantly lowerin the survival group (6.21 vs. 6.92, Conclusion: Our data indicate that sustained hemodynamic improvement, particularly in cardiac power output, is associated with survival, independently ofthe absolute changes in Impella flow and power.
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.