ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Dobutamine versus milrinone for inferior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with right ventricular involvement: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Inferior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by right ventricular involvement (RVMI) leads to right-heart-dominant failure and a higher incidence of cardiogenic shock (CS). Evidence guiding the choice between inotropic agents in this specific phenotype remains limited. Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study included 211 patients with inferior STEMI and suspected RVMI treated with either dobutamine (n = 55) or milrinone (n = 156) between June 2009 and June 2025. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included duration of inotropic support and hospital length of stay. Confounding and missing data were addressed using multiple imputation, multivariable Cox regression, inverse probability of treatment weighting, and sensitivity analyses. Results: The dobutamine group had more severe hemodynamic and electrical instability, while the milrinone group exhibited greater left ventricular dysfunction. The 30-day mortality rates were 25.5% for dobutamine and 29.5% for milrinone. No significant difference was found in unadjusted (HR 0.863; 95% CI 0.475-1.570; P = 0.632) or multivariable-adjusted Cox analysis (HR 0.612; 95% CI 0.316-1.187; P = 0.153), with results remaining consistent across multiple sensitivity and propensity-based analyses. Notably, among survivors, the duration of inotropic support was significantly shorter in the dobutamine group (3.1 vs. 5.0 days; adjusted β = -1.805; 95% CI -3.147 to -0.463; P = 0.009). Conclusion: In patients with inferior STEMI and suspected RVMI, no statistically significant difference in 30-day mortality was detected between dobutamine and milrinone, though the study was underpowered to establish equivalence. Dobutamine was associated with a shorter duration of support among survivors despite its application in more unstable patients. Inotrope selection should therefore be individualized based on the patient's hemodynamic phenotypes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.