314 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31254325)
1. Outcomes of nonemergent percutaneous coronary intervention requiring mechanical circulatory support in patients without cardiogenic shock.
Al-Khadra Y; Alraies MC; Darmoch F; Pacha HM; Soud M; Kaki A; Rab T; Grines CL; Meraj P; Alaswad K; Kwok CS; Mamas M; Kapadia S
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2020 Feb; 95(3):503-512. PubMed ID: 31254325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Use of Mechanical Circulatory Support in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States.
Khera R; Cram P; Vaughan-Sarrazin M; Horwitz PA; Girotra S
Am J Cardiol; 2016 Jan; 117(1):10-6. PubMed ID: 26547292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Mechanical circulatory support versus vasopressors alone in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
Javaid AI; Michalek JE; Gruslova AB; Hoskins SA; Ahsan CH; Feldman MD
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2024 Jan; 103(1):30-41. PubMed ID: 37997292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device vs. Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump for Hemodynamic Support in Acute Myocardial Infarction-Related Cardiogenic Shock and Coexistent Atrial Fibrillation: A Nationwide Propensity-Matched Analysis'.
Desai R; Hanna B; Singh S; Gupta S; Deshmukh A; Kumar G; Sachdeva R; Berman AE
Am J Med Sci; 2021 Jan; 361(1):55-62. PubMed ID: 33008567
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Association of Use of an Intravascular Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-aortic Balloon Pump With In-Hospital Mortality and Major Bleeding Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.
Dhruva SS; Ross JS; Mortazavi BJ; Hurley NC; Krumholz HM; Curtis JP; Berkowitz A; Masoudi FA; Messenger JC; Parzynski CS; Ngufor C; Girotra S; Amin AP; Shah ND; Desai NR
JAMA; 2020 Feb; 323(8):734-745. PubMed ID: 32040163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Contemporary trends in use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute MI and cardiogenic shock.
Helgestad OKL; Josiassen J; Hassager C; Jensen LO; Holmvang L; Udesen NLJ; Schmidt H; Berg Ravn H; Moller JE
Open Heart; 2020; 7(1):e001214. PubMed ID: 32201591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparative Healthcare Resource Utilization of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Using Impella Versus Intra-aortic Balloon Pump Use for Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Cardiogenic Shock Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: Insights From National Inpatient Sample.
Dodoo SN; Kwapong YA; Agyemang-Sarpong A; Amoran E; Egolum UO; Ghasemzadeh N; Ramadan R; Henry G; Samady H
Curr Probl Cardiol; 2024 Jan; 49(1 Pt A):102053. PubMed ID: 37640173
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The efficacy and safety of mechanical hemodynamic support in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with or without cardiogenic shock: Bayesian approach network meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials.
Lee JM; Park J; Kang J; Jeon KH; Jung JH; Lee SE; Han JK; Kim HL; Yang HM; Park KW; Kang HJ; Koo BK; Kim SH; Kim HS
Int J Cardiol; 2015 Apr; 184():36-46. PubMed ID: 25697869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis Comparing Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump During High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Cardiogenic Shock.
Rios SA; Bravo CA; Weinreich M; Olmedo W; Villablanca P; Villela MA; Ramakrishna H; Hirji S; Robles OA; Mahato P; Gluud C; Bhatt DL; Jorde UP
Am J Cardiol; 2018 Oct; 122(8):1330-1338. PubMed ID: 30146099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Percutaneous Microaxial Ventricular Assist Device Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump for Nonacute Myocardial Infarction Cardiogenic Shock.
Watanabe A; Miyamoto Y; Ueyama H; Gotanda H; Tsugawa Y; Kuno T
J Am Heart Assoc; 2024 Jun; 13(11):e034645. PubMed ID: 38804220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Trends in the use of percutaneous ventricular assist devices: analysis of national inpatient sample data, 2007 through 2012.
Khera R; Cram P; Lu X; Vyas A; Gerke A; Rosenthal GE; Horwitz PA; Girotra S
JAMA Intern Med; 2015 Jun; 175(6):941-50. PubMed ID: 25822170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Ten-year trends, predictors and outcomes of mechanical circulatory support in percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock.
Vallabhajosyula S; Prasad A; Sandhu GS; Bell MR; Gulati R; Eleid MF; Best PJM; Gersh BJ; Singh M; Lerman A; Holmes DR; Rihal CS; Barsness GW;
EuroIntervention; 2021 Feb; 16(15):e1254-e1261. PubMed ID: 31746759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Safety and efficacy of mechanical circulatory support with Impella or intra-aortic balloon pump for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention and/or cardiogenic shock: Insights from a network meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Kuno T; Takagi H; Ando T; Kodaira M; Numasawa Y; Fox J; Bangalore S
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2021 Apr; 97(5):E636-E645. PubMed ID: 32894797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Diffusion of Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices in US Markets.
Bjarnason TA; Mentias A; Panaich S; Vaughan Sarrazin M; Gao Y; Desai M; Pandey A; Dhruva SS; Desai NR; Girotra S
Circ Cardiovasc Interv; 2022 Aug; 15(8):e011778. PubMed ID: 35904015
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Nonroutine Use of Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Myocardial Infarction With Successful and Unsuccessful Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
Hawranek M; Gierlotka M; Pres D; Zembala M; Gąsior M
JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2018 Sep; 11(18):1885-1893. PubMed ID: 30236362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A Comparison of In-Hospital Outcomes Between the Use of Impella and IABP in Acute Myocardial Infarction Cardiogenic Shock Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
Jin C; Yandrapalli S; Yang Y; Liu B; Aronow WS; Naidu SS
J Invasive Cardiol; 2022 Feb; 34(2):E98-E103. PubMed ID: 35100554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Use of mechanical circulatory support in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry.
Sandhu A; McCoy LA; Negi SI; Hameed I; Atri P; Al'Aref SJ; Curtis J; McNulty E; Anderson HV; Shroff A; Menegus M; Swaminathan RV; Gurm H; Messenger J; Wang T; Bradley SM
Circulation; 2015 Sep; 132(13):1243-51. PubMed ID: 26286905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Predictors of mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention and intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation.
Schwarz B; Abdel-Wahab M; Robinson DR; Richardt G
Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed; 2016 Nov; 111(8):715-722. PubMed ID: 26596273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Etiologies and predictors of 30-day readmissions in patients undergoing percutaneous mechanical circulatory support-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: Insights from the Nationwide Readmissions Database.
Bavishi C; Lemor A; Trivedi V; Chatterjee S; Moreno P; Lasala J; Aronow HD; Dawn Abbott J
Clin Cardiol; 2018 Apr; 41(4):450-457. PubMed ID: 29697866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Trends in mechanical circulatory support use and hospital mortality among patients with acute myocardial infarction and non-infarction related cardiogenic shock in the United States.
Shah M; Patnaik S; Patel B; Ram P; Garg L; Agarwal M; Agrawal S; Arora S; Patel N; Wald J; Jorde UP
Clin Res Cardiol; 2018 Apr; 107(4):287-303. PubMed ID: 29134345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
