Litcius/Paper detail

MI2AMI-CS: A meta-analysis comparing Impella and IABP outcomes in Acute Myocardial Infarction-related Cardiogenic Shock

Tommaso De Ferrari, Lorenzo Pistelli, Marco Franzino, Agustin Ezequiel Molinero, Giulia Azzurra De Santis, Alessandro Di Carlo, Giampaolo Vetta, Antonio Parlavecchio, Luigi Fimiani, Andrea Picci, Giuseppe Certo, Francesca Parisi, Giuseppe Venuti

2024International Journal of Cardiology17 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic Shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) poses a significant mortality risk, suggesting the opportunity to implement effective mechanical circulatory support strategies. The comparative efficacy of Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) and Impella in managing CS-AMI remains a subject of investigation. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of Impella and IABP in managing CS-AMI, exploring mortality and adverse events. METHODS: A systematic search of major databases from inception to November 2023 identified eight studies, comprising 10,628 patients, comparing Impella and IABP in CS-AMI. Retrospective studies (preferably Propensity-matched) and Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) were included. RESULTS: Impella use exhibited significantly higher mortality (57% vs. 46%; OR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.29-1.60; p < 0.001) and major bleeding (30% vs 15%; OR: 2.93, 95% CI: 1.67-5.13; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In unselected CS-AMI patients, Impella usage is associated with significantly higher mortality and major bleeding.

Topics & Concepts

ImpellaCardiogenic shockMedicineMyocardial infarctionCardiologyInternal medicineIntra-aortic balloon pumpCirculatory systemShock (circulatory)Intra-Aortic Balloon PumpingMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesCardiac Structural Anomalies and RepairAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
MI2AMI-CS: A meta-analysis comparing Impella and IABP outcomes in Acute Myocardial Infarction-related Cardiogenic Shock | Litcius