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 *

108 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 39389740)

  • 41. Impella 2.5 initiated prior to unprotected left main PCI in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock improves early survival.
    Meraj PM; Doshi R; Schreiber T; Maini B; O'Neill WW
    J Interv Cardiol; 2017 Jun; 30(3):256-263. PubMed ID: 28419573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. The cVAD registry for percutaneous temporary hemodynamic support: A prospective registry of Impella mechanical circulatory support use in high-risk PCI, cardiogenic shock, and decompensated heart failure.
    Vetrovec GW; Anderson M; Schreiber T; Popma J; Lombardi W; Maini B; Moller JE; Schäfer A; Dixon SR; Hall S; Ohman EM; Mindrescu C; Moses J; O'Neill W
    Am Heart J; 2018 May; 199():115-121. PubMed ID: 29754648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Secular Trend in the Use and Implementation of Impella in High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Cardiogenic Shock: A Real-World Experience.
    Hritani AW; Wani AS; Olet S; Lauterbach CJ; Allaqaband SQ; Bajwa T; Jan MF
    J Invasive Cardiol; 2019 Sep; 31(9):E265-E270. PubMed ID: 31478893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. 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]  

  • 45. Sex Differences in pLVAD-Assisted High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the PROTECT III Study.
    Shah T; Abu-Much A; Batchelor WB; Grines CL; Baron SJ; Zhou Z; Li Y; Maini AS; Redfors B; Hussain Y; Wollmuth JR; Basir MB; O'Neill WW; Lansky AJ
    JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2023 Jul; 16(14):1721-1729. PubMed ID: 37409991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. 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]  

  • 47. 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]  

  • 48. 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]  

  • 49. 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]  

  • 50. Impella support for cardiogenic shock and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: A single-center experience.
    Brandão M; Caeiro D; Pires-Morais G; Almeida JG; Teixeira PG; Silva MP; Ponte M; Dias A; Oliveira M; Rodrigues A; Braga P
    Rev Port Cardiol (Engl Ed); 2021 Nov; 40(11):853-861. PubMed ID: 34857158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Long-Term Outcomes of Extent of Revascularization in Complex High Risk and Indicated Patients Undergoing Impella-Protected Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Report from the Roma-Verona Registry.
    Burzotta F; Russo G; Ribichini F; Piccoli A; D'Amario D; Paraggio L; Previ L; Pesarini G; Porto I; Leone AM; Niccoli G; Aurigemma C; Verdirosi D; Crea F; Trani C
    J Interv Cardiol; 2019; 2019():5243913. PubMed ID: 31772533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. 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]  

  • 53. Multicenter registry of Impella-assisted high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions and cardiogenic shock in Poland (IMPELLA-PL).
    Pietrasik A; Gąsecka A; Pawłowski T; Sacha J; Grygier M; Bielawski G; Balak W; Sukiennik A; Burzyńska P; Witkowski A; Warniełło M; Rzeszutko Ł; Bartuś S; Pawlik A; Kaczyński M; Gil R; Kuliczkowski W; Reczuch K; Protasiewicz M; Kleczyński P; Wańczura P; Gurba S; Kochanowska A; Łomiak M; Cacko A; Skorupski W; Zarębiński M; Pawluczuk P; Włodarczak S; Włodarczak A; Ściborski K; Telichowski A; Pluciński M; Hiczkiewicz J; Konsek K; Hawranek M; Gąsior M; Peruga J; Fiutowski M; Romanek R; Kasprzyk P; Ciećwierz D; Ochała A; Wojakowski W; Legutko J; Kochman J
    Kardiol Pol; 2023; 81(11):1103-1112. PubMed ID: 37937354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Impact of in-Hospital Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Recovery on Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Who Underwent Impella Support for HR PCI or Cardiogenic Shock: A Sub-Analysis from the IMP-IT Registry.
    Iannaccone M; Franchin L; Burzotta F; Botti G; Pazzanese V; Briguori C; Trani C; Piva T; De Marco F; Masiero G; Di Biasi M; Pagnotta P; Casu G; Scandroglio AM; Tarantini G; Chieffo A
    J Pers Med; 2023 May; 13(5):. PubMed ID: 37240996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. 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]  

  • 56. Microaxial circulatory support for percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Leon SA; Rosen JL; Ahmad D; Austin MA; Vishnevsky A; Rajapreyar IN; Ruggiero NJ; Rame JE; Entwistle JW; Massey HT; Tchantchaleishvili V
    Artif Organs; 2023 Jun; 47(6):934-942. PubMed ID: 36691820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. 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]  

  • 58. The Role of Mechanical Circulatory Support During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients Without Severely Depressed Left Ventricular Function.
    Alaswad K; Basir MB; Khandelwal A; Schreiber T; Lombardi W; O'Neill W
    Am J Cardiol; 2018 Mar; 121(6):703-708. PubMed ID: 29370923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Comparison of the use of hemodynamic support in patients ≥80 years versus patients <80 years during high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (from the Multicenter PROTECT II Randomized Study).
    Pershad A; Fraij G; Massaro JM; David SW; Kleiman NS; Denktas AE; Wilson BH; Dixon SR; Ohman EM; Douglas PS; Moses JW; O'Neill WW
    Am J Cardiol; 2014 Sep; 114(5):657-64. PubMed ID: 25037676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Women With Cardiogenic Shock Derive Greater Benefit From Early Mechanical Circulatory Support: An Update From the cVAD Registry.
    Joseph SM; Brisco MA; Colvin M; Grady KL; Walsh MN; Cook JL;
    J Interv Cardiol; 2016 Jun; 29(3):248-56. PubMed ID: 27229327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.