Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36304552›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022

Mechanical circulatory support in ventricular arrhythmias.

Guido Tavazzi, Valentino Dammassa, Costanza Natalia Julia Colombo, Eloisa Arbustini, Thomas Castelein, Martin Balik, Christophe Vandenbriele

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The role and mechanism of heme oxygenase-1 in arrhythmias.Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Guido TavazziDepartment of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Paediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Valentino DammassaPhD in Experimental Medicine, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Costanza Natalia Julia ColomboDepartment of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care and Pain Therapy, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy.
Eloisa ArbustiniCentre for Inherited Cardiovascular Diseases, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy.
Thomas CasteleinCardiovascular Center, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis Hospital, Aalst, Belgium.
Martin BalikDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, First Medical Faculty and General University Hospital, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czechia.
Christophe VandenbrieleAdult Intensive Care Unit, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Policlinico San Matteo Fondazione · ITUniversity of Pavia · ITCharles University · CZOnze Lieve Vrouwziekenhuis Hospital · BERoyal Brompton Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In atrial and ventricular tachyarrhythmias, reduced time for ventricular filling and loss of atrial contribution lead to a significant reduction in cardiac output, resulting in cardiogenic shock. This may also occur during catheter ablation in 11% of overall procedures and is associated with increased mortality. Managing cardiogenic shock and (supra) ventricular arrhythmias is particularly challenging. Inotropic support may exacerbate tachyarrhythmias or accelerate heart rate; antiarrhythmic drugs often come with negative inotropic effects, and electrical reconversions may risk worsening circulatory failure or even cardiac arrest. The drop in native cardiac output during an arrhythmic storm can be partly covered by the insertion of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices guaranteeing end-organ perfusion. This provides physicians a time window of stability to investigate the underlying cause of arrhythmia and allow proper therapeutic interventions (e.g., percutaneous coronary intervention and catheter ablation). Temporary MCS can be used in the case of overt hemodynamic decompensation or as a "preemptive strategy" to avoid circulatory instability during interventional cardiology procedures in high-risk patients. Despite the increasing use of MCS in cardiogenic shock and during catheter ablation procedures, the recommendation level is still low, considering the lack of large observational studies and randomized clinical trials. Therefore, the evidence on the timing and the kinds of MCS devices has also scarcely been investigated. In the current review, we discuss the available evidence in the literature and gaps in knowledge on the use of MCS devices in the setting of ventricular arrhythmias and arrhythmic storms, including a specific focus on pathophysiology and related therapies.

Indexed as

arrhythmiasextracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)hemodynamicmechanical circulatory support (MCS)review

Identifiers

PMID36304552
PMCPMC9593033
OpenAlexW4304183808

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.