258 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37640173)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Changing Trends in Mechanical Circulatory Support Use and Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions for Acute Coronary Syndrome Complicated With Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From a Nationwide Registry in Japan.
Nishimoto Y; Inohara T; Kohsaka S; Sakakura K; Kawai T; Kikuchi A; Watanabe T; Yamada T; Fukunami M; Yamaji K; Ishii H; Amano T; Kozuma K;
J Am Heart Assoc; 2023 Dec; 12(23):e031838. PubMed ID: 38038195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Percutaneous coronary intervention with Impella support with and without intra-aortic balloon in cardiogenic shock patients.
Bhuiyan R; Bimal T; Fishbein J; Gandotra P; Selim S; Ong L; Gruberg L
Cardiovasc Revasc Med; 2023 Oct; 55():68-73. PubMed ID: 37076412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impella Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump for High-Risk PCI: A Propensity-Adjusted Large-Scale Claims Dataset Analysis.
Lansky AJ; Tirziu D; Moses JW; Pietras C; Ohman EM; O'Neill WW; Ekono MM; Grines CL; Parise H
Am J Cardiol; 2022 Dec; 185():29-36. PubMed ID: 36210212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. The role of different mechanical circulatory support devices and their timing of implantation on myocardial damage and mid-term recovery in acute myocardial infarction related cardiogenic shock.
Pieri M; Sorrentino T; Oppizzi M; Melisurgo G; Lembo R; Colombo A; Zangrillo A; Pappalardo F
J Interv Cardiol; 2018 Dec; 31(6):717-724. PubMed ID: 30460719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Impella Support for Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.
Schrage B; Ibrahim K; Loehn T; Werner N; Sinning JM; Pappalardo F; Pieri M; Skurk C; Lauten A; Landmesser U; Westenfeld R; Horn P; Pauschinger M; Eckner D; Twerenbold R; Nordbeck P; Salinger T; Abel P; Empen K; Busch MC; Felix SB; Sieweke JT; Møller JE; Pareek N; Hill J; MacCarthy P; Bergmann MW; Henriques JPS; Möbius-Winkler S; Schulze PC; Ouarrak T; Zeymer U; Schneider S; Blankenberg S; Thiele H; Schäfer A; Westermann D
Circulation; 2019 Mar; 139(10):1249-1258. PubMed ID: 30586755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The Use of Mechanical Circulatory Assist Devices for ACS Patients with Cardiogenic Shock and High-Risk PCI.
Manian N; Thakker J; Nair A
Curr Cardiol Rep; 2022 Jun; 24(6):699-709. PubMed ID: 35403950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Mechanical circulatory support with the Impella® LP5.0 pump and an intra-aortic balloon pump for cardiogenic shock in acute myocardial infarction: The IMPELLA-STIC randomized study.
Bochaton T; Huot L; Elbaz M; Delmas C; Aissaoui N; Farhat F; Mewton N; Bonnefoy E;
Arch Cardiovasc Dis; 2020 Apr; 113(4):237-243. PubMed ID: 31740272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Intra-aortic balloon pump versus percutaneous Impella
Frain K; Rees P
Perfusion; 2024 Jan; 39(1):45-59. PubMed ID: 34479465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Outcomes of mechanical circulatory support for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.
Kim Y; Shapero K; Ahn SS; Goldsweig AM; Desai N; Altin SE
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2022 Feb; 99(3):658-663. PubMed ID: 34156755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Intra-aortic balloon pump is associated with the lowest whereas Impella with the highest inpatient mortality and complications regardless of severity or hospital types.
Movahed MR; Talle A; Hashemzadeh M
Cardiovasc Interv Ther; 2024 Jul; 39(3):252-261. PubMed ID: 38555535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Trends in Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump Use in Cardiogenic Shock After the SHOCK-II Trial.
Nan Tie E; Dinh D; Chan W; Clark DJ; Ajani AE; Brennan A; Dagan M; Cohen N; Oqueli E; Freeman M; Hiew C; Shaw JA; Reid CM; Kaye DM; Stub D; Duffy SJ;
Am J Cardiol; 2023 Mar; 191():125-132. PubMed ID: 36682080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
