2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2012.06.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predictive factors for successful weaning from percutaneous cardiopulmonary support in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction

Abstract: A reduction in PCPS flow without hemodynamic collapse may allow for successful weaning from PCPS. BE may be a potent factor in determining when to terminate PCPS.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

2
6
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
2
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some available studies compared serum creatinine at the time of ECMO initiation in survivors with that of non-survivors, but no significant differences were found [30,31]. This was the same result in our study.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Some available studies compared serum creatinine at the time of ECMO initiation in survivors with that of non-survivors, but no significant differences were found [30,31]. This was the same result in our study.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…The mortality of our study is comparable, but slightly higher than that of the most recent studies on AMI, which reported in-hospital mortality rates ranging from 34% to 67% 13,14,15,16. The most likely explanation is patient selection.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 48%
“…Therefore, we could not conclude the benefit of PCPS over medical therapy or other mechanical assist devices. As a randomized trial of strategy would be quite difficult to perform and the sample size of our study was larger than that of previous studies,13,14,15 our data could provide more assistive information about clinical outcomes of AMI shock treatment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Efforts were made to compensate for these differences in the multivariable analysis, but we may not have been able to overcome the differences. Fourth, our data included a large number of patients who underwent CPR and thus showed a higher mortality than in another recent randomized trial and a registry of cardiogenic shock [3,19]. Even if there are minor benefits of IABP support, additional effects might not be evident in patients with very severe cardiogenic shock.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%