Outcomes of mechanical circulatory support for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock
Published 2021 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
Outcomes of mechanical circulatory support for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock
Authors
Keywords
-
Journal
CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -
Publisher
Wiley
Online
2021-06-22
DOI
10.1002/ccd.29834
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- 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
- (2020) Sanket S. Dhruva et al. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
- Intravascular Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-aortic Balloon Pump for Cardiogenic Shock—Reply
- (2020) Sanket S. Dhruva et al. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
- Intraaortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction
- (2019) Holger Thiele et al. CIRCULATION
- Impella Support for Acute Myocardial Infarction complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: A Matched-Pair IABP-SHOCK II Trial 30-Day Mortality Analysis
- (2019) Benedikt Schrage et al. CIRCULATION
- Twenty-Year Trends in the Incidence and Outcome of Cardiogenic Shock in AMIS Plus Registry
- (2019) Lukas Hunziker et al. Circulation-Cardiovascular Interventions
- Temporal trends in incidence and patient characteristics in cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction from 2010 to 2017: a Danish cohort study
- (2019) Ole K.L. Helgestad et al. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE
- The Evolving Landscape of Impella® Use in the United States Among Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Mechanical Circulatory Support
- (2019) Amit P. Amin et al. CIRCULATION
- Analysis of outcomes for 15,259 US patients with acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (AMICS) supported with the Impella device
- (2018) William W. O'Neill et al. AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL
- Percutaneous short-term active mechanical support devices in cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials
- (2017) Holger Thiele et al. EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
- Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump for Treating Cardiogenic Shock
- (2017) Dagmar M. Ouweneel et al. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
- Trends in the Use of Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices
- (2015) Rohan Khera et al. JAMA Internal Medicine
- Trends in Incidence, Management, and Outcomes of Cardiogenic Shock Complicating ST‐Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the United States
- (2014) Dhaval Kolte et al. Journal of the American Heart Association
- Percutaneous Left-Ventricular Support With the Impella-2.5–Assist Device in Acute Cardiogenic Shock
- (2012) Alexander Lauten et al. Circulation-Heart Failure
- Intraaortic Balloon Support for Myocardial Infarction with Cardiogenic Shock
- (2012) Holger Thiele et al. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
- 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Executive Summary
- (2011) et al. CIRCULATION
- Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices vs. intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation for treatment of cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis of controlled trials
- (2009) J. M. Cheng et al. EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
Discover Peeref hubs
Discuss science. Find collaborators. Network.
Join a conversationAsk a Question. Answer a Question.
Quickly pose questions to the entire community. Debate answers and get clarity on the most important issues facing researchers.
Get Started