↓ Skip to main content

Intra-aortic balloon pump in cardiogenic shock: state of the art

Overview of attention for article published in Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 241)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Intra-aortic balloon pump in cardiogenic shock: state of the art
Published in
Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, February 2017
DOI 10.1590/0100-69912017001006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Petronio Generoso Thomaz, Leonel Adelino Moura, Giovana Muramoto, Renato Samy Assad

Abstract

The clinical definition of cardiogenic shock is that of a low cardiac output and evidence of tissue hypoxia in the presence of adequate blood volume. Cardiogenic shock is the main cause of death related to acute myocardial infarction (AMI), with a mortality rate of 45-70% in the absence of aggressive and highly specialized technical care. The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is one of the most widely used mechanical assisting devices. During the last two decades, about 42% of patients with AMI who evolved with cardiogenic shock received mechanical circulatory assistance with IABP. Its clinical indication has been based on non-randomized studies and registry data. Recent studies have shown that the use of IABP did not reduce 30-day mortality in patients with AMI and cardiogenic shock treated with the strategy of early myocardial revascularization as the planned primary objective. The guidelines of the American Heart Association and of the European Society of Cardiology have reassessed their recommendations based on the results of meta-analyzes, including the IABP-SCHOCK II Trial study, which did not evidence an increase in survival of patients who received mechanical support with IABP. This review article addresses the clinical impact of IABP use in the cardiogenic shock caused by AMI. RESUMO A definição clínica de choque cardiogênico é a de um quadro de baixo débito cardíaco e evidência de hipóxia tecidual, na presença de volemia adequada. O choque cardiogênico representa a principal causa de óbito relacionada ao infarto agudo do miocárdio (IAM), com índice de mortalidade em torno de 45% a 70%, na ausência de cuidados técnicos agressivos e altamente especializados. O balão intra-aórtico (BIA) é um dos dispositivos de assistência mecânica mais utilizados no mundo. Nas duas últimas décadas, cerca de 42% dos pacientes com IAM, que evoluíram com choque cardiogênico, receberam assistência circulatória mecânica com BIA. Sua indicação clínica tem sido baseada em estudos não randomizados e dados de registro. Estudos recentes têm demonstrado que o uso do BIA não reduziu a mortalidade hospitalar (30 dias) em pacientes com IAM e choque cardiogênico, tratados com a estratégia de revascularização precoce do miocárdio como objetivo primário planejado. As diretrizes da Associação Americana de Cardiologia e da Sociedade Europeia de Cardiologia reavaliaram suas recomendações, baseadas nos resultados de metanálises, incluindo o estudo IABP-SCHOCK II Trial, que não evidenciou aumento na sobrevida de pacientes que receberam suporte mecânico com BIA. Este artigo de revisão aborda o impacto clínico do uso do BIA no choque cardiogênico ocasionado pelo IAM.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 21%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Student > Master 2 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 4%
Researcher 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 6 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 25%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Unknown 11 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 May 2017.
All research outputs
#15,173,117
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões
#46
of 241 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,058
of 424,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 241 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them