2023
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.12.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trends in Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump Use in Cardiogenic Shock After the SHOCK-II Trial

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Finally, recent guidelines for the use of IABP in CS do not recommend it anymore; however, IABP is still used as a last-resort treatment for patients in severe CS to increase myocardial perfusion. [43] In conclusion, this study demonstrated that patients with MI in CS treated with ECMO, in addition to IABP support, have comparable overall 30-day and 1-year risks of mortality compared to those not managed with ECMO. However, it appears that survivors after short-term ECMO support may have a better clinical outcome which should be considered hypothesis-generating.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 51%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Finally, recent guidelines for the use of IABP in CS do not recommend it anymore; however, IABP is still used as a last-resort treatment for patients in severe CS to increase myocardial perfusion. [43] In conclusion, this study demonstrated that patients with MI in CS treated with ECMO, in addition to IABP support, have comparable overall 30-day and 1-year risks of mortality compared to those not managed with ECMO. However, it appears that survivors after short-term ECMO support may have a better clinical outcome which should be considered hypothesis-generating.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 51%
“…Finally, recent guidelines for the use of IABP in CS do not recommend it anymore; however, IABP is still used as a last-resort treatment for patients in severe CS to increase myocardial perfusion. [43]…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, however, the application of IABP in cardiogenic shock was significantly influenced by the results of IABP-SHOCK. Based on IABP-SHOCK, the use of IABP has decreased dramatically since 2012, despite increasing rates of infarct-related cardiogenic shock [ 19 ]. Despite several pathophysiological studies suggesting a hemodynamic gain under IABP for cardiogenic shock [ 20 , 21 ], only one randomized trial, IABP-SHOCK, indicates no improvement was observed in measured hemodynamic parameters [ 22 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%