Rao Lingzhang, Huang Xianli, Luo Jinlan
Department of Cardiology, Wuhan Wuchang Hospital, Wuchang Hospital Affiliated to Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Hubei, China.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Mar 26;100(12):e25159. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000025159.
The survival benefit and safety of Impella support versus intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock were investigated in several observational trials that revealed mixed results. Thus, in order to provide new evidence-based medical evidence for clinical treatment, we undertook a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of Impella versus IABP in AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock.
We will search the EMBASE, Web of Knowledge, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library from inception to Mar 2021 to retrieve relevant studies. Two independent authors will extract the information from the selected studies. Disagreements will be resolved through a discussion with a third review author. The outcomes include mortality and complications. The quality of randomized trials will be assessed by Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the risk of bias in non-randomized studies - of Interventions for non-randomized, observational studies. Review Manager software (v 5.4; Cochrane Collaboration) will be used for the meta-analysis.
The present meta-analysis will compare the efficacy and safety of Impella versus IABP in AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock.
The results of our review will be reported strictly following the PRISMA criteria and the review will add to the existing literature by showing compelling evidence and improved guidance in clinic settings.
10.17605/OSF.IO/SKEQ7.
Ethical approval and patient consent are not required because this study is a literature-based study. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
在多项观察性试验中，对急性心肌梗死（AMI）合并心源性休克患者使用Impella支持与主动脉内球囊反搏（IABP）的生存获益和安全性进行了研究，结果不一。因此，为了为临床治疗提供新的循证医学证据，我们进行了一项荟萃分析，以评估Impella与IABP在AMI合并心源性休克中的疗效和安全性。
我们将检索EMBASE、Web of Knowledge、PubMed、ClinicalTrials.gov和Cochrane图书馆，从数据库建立至2021年3月，以检索相关研究。两名独立作者将从所选研究中提取信息。分歧将通过与第三位综述作者讨论来解决。结局包括死亡率和并发症。随机试验的质量将通过Cochrane随机对照试验偏倚风险工具以及非随机研究（干预性非随机观察性研究）中的偏倚风险进行评估。将使用Review Manager软件（v 5.4；Cochrane协作网）进行荟萃分析。
本荟萃分析将比较Impella与IABP在AMI合并心源性休克中的疗效和安全性。
我们综述的结果将严格按照PRISMA标准报告，该综述将通过展示令人信服的证据并在临床环境中提供改进的指导，为现有文献增添内容。
10.17605/OSF.IO/SKEQ7。
由于本研究是基于文献的研究，因此无需伦理批准和患者同意。本系统评价和荟萃分析将发表在同行评审期刊上。
