These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

345 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31866154)

  • 21. Gender disparities with the use of percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention complicated by cardiogenic shock: From pVAD Working Group.
    Doshi R; Patel K; Decter D; Jauhar R; Meraj P
    Indian Heart J; 2018 Jul; 70 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S90-S95. PubMed ID: 30122245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. High-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with the TandemHeart and Impella devices: a single-center experience.
    Schwartz BG; Ludeman DJ; Mayeda GS; Kloner RA; Economides C; Burstein S
    J Invasive Cardiol; 2011 Oct; 23(10):417-24. PubMed ID: 21972160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Timing of Impella implantation and outcomes in cardiogenic shock or high-risk percutaneous coronary revascularization.
    Tarantini G; Masiero G; Burzotta F; Pazzanese V; Briguori C; Trani C; Piva T; De Marco F; Di Biasi M; Pagnotta P; Mojoli M; Casu G; Giustino G; Lorenzoni G; Montorfano M; Ancona MB; Pappalardo F; Chieffo A;
    Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2021 Aug; 98(2):E222-E234. PubMed ID: 33793051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Clinical outcomes in patients undergoing complex, high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention and haemodynamic support with intra-aortic balloon versus Impella pump: Real-life single-centre preliminary results.
    Januszek R; Pawlik A; Rzeszutko Ł; Bartuś K; Bartuś S
    Kardiol Pol; 2022; 80(12):1224-1231. PubMed ID: 36047958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Impact of Impella RP Versus Vasoactive Treatment on Right and Left Ventricular Strain in a Porcine Model of Acute Cardiogenic Shock Induced by Right Coronary Artery Embolization.
    Frederiksen PH; Josiassen J; Udesen NLJ; Linde L; Helgestad OK; Banke A; Jensen LO; Schmidt H; Hassager C; Ravn HB; Møller JE
    J Am Heart Assoc; 2023 Feb; 12(3):e8126. PubMed ID: 36734350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Structured Weaning From the Impella Left Ventricular Micro-Axial Pump in Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock and Protected Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Experience From a Non-Cardiac Surgical Centre.
    Slack RJ; McGain F; Cox N; French C; Cheng V; Stub D; Zakhem B; Dade F; Bloom JE; Chan W; Yang Y
    Heart Lung Circ; 2024 Apr; 33(4):460-469. PubMed ID: 38388259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The current use of Impella 2.5 in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: results from the USpella Registry.
    O'Neill WW; Schreiber T; Wohns DH; Rihal C; Naidu SS; Civitello AB; Dixon SR; Massaro JM; Maini B; Ohman EM
    J Interv Cardiol; 2014 Feb; 27(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 24329756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Long term survival after early unloading with Impella CP
    Loehn T; O'Neill WW; Lange B; Pfluecke C; Schweigler T; Mierke J; Waessnig N; Mahlmann A; Youssef A; Speiser U; Strasser RH; Ibrahim K
    Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care; 2020 Mar; 9(2):149-157. PubMed ID: 30456984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Percutaneous Transvalvular Microaxial Flow Pump Support in Cardiology.
    Lüsebrink E; Kellnar A; Krieg K; Binzenhöfer L; Scherer C; Zimmer S; Schrage B; Fichtner S; Petzold T; Braun D; Peterss S; Brunner S; Hagl C; Westermann D; Hausleiter J; Massberg S; Thiele H; Schäfer A; Orban M
    Circulation; 2022 Apr; 145(16):1254-1284. PubMed ID: 35436135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices: A Health Technology Assessment.
    Health Quality Ontario
    Ont Health Technol Assess Ser; 2017; 17(2):1-97. PubMed ID: 28232854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refractory cardiogenic shock.
    Gaudard P; Mourad M; Eliet J; Zeroual N; Culas G; Rouvière P; Albat B; Colson P
    Crit Care; 2015 Oct; 19():363. PubMed ID: 26453047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Impact of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump on prognostically important clinical outcomes in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (from the PROTECT II randomized trial).
    Dangas GD; Kini AS; Sharma SK; Henriques JP; Claessen BE; Dixon SR; Massaro JM; Palacios I; Popma JJ; Ohman M; Stone GW; O'Neill WW
    Am J Cardiol; 2014 Jan; 113(2):222-8. PubMed ID: 24527505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Right Ventricular Dysfunction in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: A Hemodynamic Analysis of the Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock (SHOCK) Trial and Registry.
    Lala A; Guo Y; Xu J; Esposito M; Morine K; Karas R; Katz SD; Hochman JS; Burkhoff D; Kapur NK
    J Card Fail; 2018 Mar; 24(3):148-156. PubMed ID: 29032225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Presence of sigma shaped right coronary artery is an indicator of poor prognosis in patients with inferior myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention.
    Güngör B; Alper AT; Ozcan KS; Ekmekçi A; Karadeniz FÖ; Mutluer FO; Kaya A; Karataş B; Osmonov D; Bolca O
    Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2014 Nov; 84(6):965-72. PubMed ID: 24402881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device versus intra-aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myocardial infarction.
    Seyfarth M; Sibbing D; Bauer I; Fröhlich G; Bott-Flügel L; Byrne R; Dirschinger J; Kastrati A; Schömig A
    J Am Coll Cardiol; 2008 Nov; 52(19):1584-8. PubMed ID: 19007597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Utilization of the Impella for hemodynamic support during percutaneous intervention and cardiogenic shock: an insight.
    Nalluri N; Patel N; Saouma S; Anugu VR; Anugula D; Asti D; Mehta V; Kumar V; Atti V; Edla S; Grewal RK; Khan HM; Kanotra R; Maniatis G; Kandov R; Lafferty JC; Dyal M; Alfonso CE; Cohen MG
    Expert Rev Med Devices; 2017 Oct; 14(10):789-804. PubMed ID: 28862481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. [Temporary percutaneous ventricular assist devices for cardiogenic shock and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic literature review].
    Negro A; Pecoraro V; Camerlingo MD; Maltoni S
    G Ital Cardiol (Rome); 2020 Feb; 21(2):128-137. PubMed ID: 32051636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Prophylactic use of intra-aortic balloon pump for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: will the Impella LP 2.5 device show superiority in a clinical randomized study?
    Syed AI; Kakkar A; Torguson R; Li Y; Ben-Dor I; Collins SD; Lemesle G; Maluenda G; Xue Z; Scheinowitz M; Kaneshige K; Satler LF; Kent KM; Suddath WO; Pichard AD; Lindsay J; Waksman R
    Cardiovasc Revasc Med; 2010; 11(2):91-7. PubMed ID: 20347798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Novel technique of performing multivessel PCI through an Impella sheath.
    Kumar K; Reddy S; Acharya D; Lotun K
    Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2020 Jul; 96(1):117-120. PubMed ID: 31696630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The role of the axillary Impella 5.0 device on patients with acute cardiogenic shock.
    Tarabichi S; Ikegami H; Russo MJ; Lee LY; Lemaire A
    J Cardiothorac Surg; 2020 Aug; 15(1):218. PubMed ID: 32795321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.