Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 6, 2026

Reduction in Left Ventricular Wall Stress and Improvement in Function in Failing Hearts using Algisyl-LVR
Published on: April 8, 2013
Early Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Stress-Induced Cardiomyopathy Receiving Acute Mechanical Support in the US
Sun-Joo Jang1, Fabricio Malaguez Webber2, Md Mashiul Alam2
1Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Background:
The role of acute mechanical circulatory support (aMCS) in patients with stress-induced cardiomyopathy (SIC) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) is not well studied. Here, we describe the incidence and outcomes of aMCS use in SIC-CS using a large national database.
Methods:
Using the Nationwide Readmissions Database from January 2016 to November 2019, we identified patients hospitalized with SIC who received isolated intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), microaxial flow pump (Impella, Abiomed), or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) during the index hospitalization.
Results:
A total of 902 among 94,709 hospitalizations for SIC (1.0%) required aMCS during the index hospitalization: 611 had IABP (67.7%), 189 had Impella (21.0%) and 102 had ECMO (11.3%). Patients with ECMO or Impella had higher in-hospital mortality rates than those with IABP (37.3% vs 29.1% vs 18.5%, respectively). There was an increased adjusted risk of in-hospital death with Impella (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.98; 95% CI, 1.12-3.49) and ECMO (aOR, 4.15; 95% CI, 1.85-9.32) vs IABP. Impella was associated with an increased adjusted risk of 30-day readmission compared to IABP (aOR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.16-5.51). Patients with ECMO or Impella had a higher incidence of renal replacement therapy and vascular/bleeding complications compared to those who received IABP.
Conclusions:
In this nationwide analysis using an administrative database, patients who received ECMO and Impella showed higher rates of in-hospital mortality, renal replacement therapy, and vascular/bleeding complications compared to those who received IABP. Patients with more comorbidities may receive more aggressive hemodynamic support which may account for observed mortality differences. Future prospective studies with objective and universal characterization of baseline clinical and hemodynamic characteristics of patients with CS secondary to SIC are needed.
Related Concept Videos
Myocarditis III: Medical Management
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy III: Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care

