National Use Patterns and Comparative Effectiveness of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Myocardial Infarction–Related Cardiogenic Shock

Background Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) provides bi‐ventricular support for patients with myocardial infarction–related cardiogenic shock (MI‐CS); comparative effectiveness data relative to other mechanical circulatory support remain limited. We characterize contemporary ECMO utilization for MI‐CS and compare short‐term mortality across ECMO and non‐ECMO treatment strategies. Methods We compared baseline characteristics and temporal trends in mechanical circulatory support utilization among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with MI‐CS from 2016 to 2023 and treated with ECMO, Impella, intra‐aortic balloon pump, or medical management alone. Patient outcomes for each group were evaluated using inverse probability of treatment weighting, G‐formula approach, and grace period analysis. The primary endpoint was 30‐day all‐cause mortality. Results The cohort included 102 718 patients: 1165 (1.1%) treated with ECMO, 10 064 (9.8%) Impella, 24 631 (24.0%) intra‐aortic balloon pump, and 66 858 (65.1%) medical management alone. From 2016 to 2023, ECMO use for MI‐CS increased from 0.8% to 1.8%. The percentage of hospitals using ECMO increased from 9.2% to 17.1%. Unadjusted 30‐day mortality was higher for ECMO (69%) compared with Impella (60%), intra‐aortic balloon pump (39%), and medical management (46%) (all P <0.0001). Adjusted inverse probability of treatment weighting and G‐formula analyses revealed a 30‐day mortality rate of 68%–70% for ECMO, which was higher than that for other therapies. The grace period analysis revealed similar mortality between patients treated with ECMO (54%) and Impella (54%). Conclusions ECMO use in a contemporary Medicare cohort of patients with MI‐CS was infrequent (1.1%) and associated with high 30‐day mortality. Despite use of complementary causal inference methods, we were unable to establish valid causal inferences on ECMO use and patient survival.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the American Heart Association
Published
2026-10-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.126.049443
Primary Topic
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

National Use Patterns and Comparative Effectiveness of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Myocardial Infarction–Related Cardiogenic Shock

Navin Kumar Kapur, Arthur Reshad Garan, Andrew A. Farb, Christina Lalani et al.
1 links
Journal of the American Heart Association
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
article

National Use Patterns and Comparative Effectiveness of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Myocardial Infarction–Related Cardiogenic Shock

Navin Kumar Kapur, Arthur Reshad Garan, Andrew A. Farb, Christina Lalani, Ajar Kochar, Eric Alexander Secemsky, Zaid Almarzooq, Robert W. Yeh, Jacob Eifer Møller, Yang Song, Bram D. Zuckerman, Changfu Wu
article en

Abstract

Background Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) provides bi‐ventricular support for patients with myocardial infarction–related cardiogenic shock (MI‐CS); comparative effectiveness data relative to other mechanical circulatory support remain limited. We characterize contemporary ECMO utilization for MI‐CS and compare short‐term mortality across ECMO and non‐ECMO treatment strategies. Methods We compared baseline characteristics and temporal trends in mechanical circulatory support utilization among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with MI‐CS from 2016 to 2023 and treated with ECMO, Impella, intra‐aortic balloon pump, or medical management alone. Patient outcomes for each group were evaluated using inverse probability of treatment weighting, G‐formula approach, and grace period analysis. The primary endpoint was 30‐day all‐cause mortality. Results The cohort included 102 718 patients: 1165 (1.1%) treated with ECMO, 10 064 (9.8%) Impella, 24 631 (24.0%) intra‐aortic balloon pump, and 66 858 (65.1%) medical management alone. From 2016 to 2023, ECMO use for MI‐CS increased from 0.8% to 1.8%. The percentage of hospitals using ECMO increased from 9.2% to 17.1%. Unadjusted 30‐day mortality was higher for ECMO (69%) compared with Impella (60%), intra‐aortic balloon pump (39%), and medical management (46%) (all P <0.0001). Adjusted inverse probability of treatment weighting and G‐formula analyses revealed a 30‐day mortality rate of 68%–70% for ECMO, which was higher than that for other therapies. The grace period analysis revealed similar mortality between patients treated with ECMO (54%) and Impella (54%). Conclusions ECMO use in a contemporary Medicare cohort of patients with MI‐CS was infrequent (1.1%) and associated with high 30‐day mortality. Despite use of complementary causal inference methods, we were unable to establish valid causal inferences on ECMO use and patient survival.

Journal of the American Heart Association
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US), Tufts Medical Center (US), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US), United States Food and Drug Administration (US), Harvard University (US), Copenhagen University Hospital (DK), Rigshospitalet (DK)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon