Skip Navigation


European Heart Journal Advance Access originally published online on January 30, 2009
European Heart Journal 2009 30(4):389-390; doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehp030
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
30/4/389    most recent
ehp030v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in EHJ
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Thiele, H.
Right arrow Articles by Schuler, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Thiele, H.
Right arrow Articles by Schuler, G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2009. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Cardiogenic shock: to pump or not to pump?

Holger Thiele* and Gerhard Schuler

Department of Internal Medicine/Cardiology, University of Leipzig-Heart Center, D-04289 Leipzig, Germany

* Corresponding author. Tel: + 49 341 865 1426, Fax: + 49 341 865 1461, Email: thielh@medizin.uni-leipzig.de

This editorial refers to ‘A systematic review and meta-analysis of intra-aortic balloon pump therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: should we change the guidelines?’{dagger}, by K.D. Sjauw et al. on page 459

Footnotes

The opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the Editors of the European Heart Journal or of the European Society of Cardiology.

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction still has a grim prognosis, with a mortality rate of ~50%.1,2 Over the last 10 years a steady reduction in mortality has been observed, which is mainly attributed to the increase of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for reperfusion.3 Another method considered to improve mortality is the use of intra-aortic balloon pumping (IABP) for mechanical assistance, with a class IC recommendation in the current European Society of Cardiology guidelines and a class IB recommendation in . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in EHJ:

A systematic review and meta-analysis of intra-aortic balloon pump therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: should we change the guidelines?
Krischan D. Sjauw, Annemarie E. Engström, Marije M. Vis, René J. van der Schaaf, Jan Baan, Jr, Karel T. Koch, Robbert J. de Winter, Jan J. Piek, Jan G.P. Tijssen, and José P.S. Henriques
EHJ 2009 30: 459-468. [Abstract] [Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur Heart JHome page
J. M. Cheng, C. A. den Uil, S. E. Hoeks, M. van der Ent, L. S.D. Jewbali, R. T. van Domburg, and P. W. Serruys
Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices vs. intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation for treatment of cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis of controlled trials
Eur. Heart J., September 1, 2009; 30(17): 2102 - 2108.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]