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 *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38511148)

  • 1. The use of mechanical circulatory support in elective high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions: a literature-based review.
    Geppert A; Mashayekhi K; Huber K
    Eur Heart J Open; 2024 Mar; 4(2):oeae007. PubMed ID: 38511148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Mechanical circulatory support devices for elective percutaneous coronary interventions: novel insights from the Japanese nationwide J-PCI registry.
    Muramatsu T; Inohara T; Kohsaka S; Yamaji K; Ishii H; Shinke T; Toriya T; Yoshiki Y; Ozaki Y; Ando H; Amano T; Nakamura M; Ikari Y
    Eur Heart J Open; 2022 Jul; 2(4):oeac041. PubMed ID: 35919581
    [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 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Prophylactic Mechanical Circulatory Support Use in Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease.
    Zeitouni M; Marquis-Gravel G; Smilowitz NR; Zakroysky P; Wojdyla DM; Amit AP; Rao SV; Wang TY
    Circ Cardiovasc Interv; 2022 May; 15(5):e011534. PubMed ID: 35580202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 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. 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]  

  • 12. Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices for High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
    Kar S
    Curr Cardiol Rep; 2018 Jan; 20(1):2. PubMed ID: 29350305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Outcomes of Renal Function in Cardiogenic Shock Patients With or Without Mechanical Circulatory Support.
    Upadhyaya VD; Alshami A; Patel I; Douedi S; Quinlan A; Thomas T; Prentice J; Calderon D; Asif A; Sen S; Mehra A; Hossain MA
    J Clin Med Res; 2021 May; 13(5):283-292. PubMed ID: 34104280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Complications and Outcomes in 39,864 Patients Receiving Standard Care Plus Mechanical Circulatory Support or Standard Care Alone for Infarct-Associated Cardiogenic Shock.
    Padberg JS; Feld J; Padberg L; Köppe J; Makowski L; Gerß J; Dröge P; Ruhnke T; Günster C; Lange SA; Reinecke H
    J Clin Med; 2024 Feb; 13(4):. PubMed ID: 38398478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. [How to choose between intra-aortic balloon pump, Impella and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation].
    Burzotta F; Russo G; Basile E; Aurigemma C; Leone AM; Niccoli G; Porto I; Bruno P; Massetti M; Crea F; Trani C
    G Ital Cardiol (Rome); 2018 Jun; 19(6 Suppl 1):5S-13S. PubMed ID: 29989606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. The Evolving Landscape of Impella Use in the United States Among Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Mechanical Circulatory Support.
    Amin AP; Spertus JA; Curtis JP; Desai N; Masoudi FA; Bach RG; McNeely C; Al-Badarin F; House JA; Kulkarni H; Rao SV
    Circulation; 2020 Jan; 141(4):273-284. PubMed ID: 31735078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Roadmap towards an institutional Impella programme for high-risk coronary interventions.
    Pietrasik A; Gąsecka A; Jasińska-Gniadzik K; Szwed P; Grygier M; Pawłowski T; Sacha J; Kochman J
    ESC Heart Fail; 2023 Aug; 10(4):2200-2213. PubMed ID: 37345215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.