The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial of Hemodynamic Support With Impella 2.5 Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Patients Undergoing High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The PROTECT II Study
Open accessAbstract
Background—: Although coronary artery bypass grafting is generally preferred in symptomatic patients with severe, complex multivessel, or left main disease, some patients present with clinical features that make coronary artery bypass grafting clinically unattractive. Percutaneous coronary intervention with hemodynamic support may be feasible for these patients. Currently, there is no systematic comparative evaluation of hemodynamic support devices for this indication. Methods and Results—: We randomly assigned 452 symptomatic patients with complex 3-vessel disease or unprotected left main coronary artery disease and severely depressed left ventricular function to intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) (n=226) or Impella 2.5 (n=226) support during nonemergent high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary end point was the 30-day incidence of major adverse events. A 90-day follow-up was required, as well, by protocol. Impella 2.5 provided superior hemodynamic support in comparison with IABP, with maximal decrease in cardiac power output from baseline of −0.04±0.24 W in comparison with −0.14±0.27 W for IABP ( P =0.001). The primary end point (30-day major adverse events) was not statistically different between groups: 35.1% for Impella 2.5 versus 40.1% for IABP, P =0.227 in the intent-to-treat population and 34.3% versus 42.2%, P =0.092 in the per protocol population. At 90 days, a strong trend toward decreased major adverse events was observed in Impella 2.5–supported patients in comparison with IABP: 40.6% versus 49.3%, P =0.066 in the intent-to-treat population and 40.0% versus 51.0%, P =0.023 in the per protocol population, respectively. Conclusions—: The 30-day incidence of major adverse events was not different for patients with IABP or Impella 2.5 hemodynamic support. However, trends for improved outcomes were observed for Impella 2.5–supported patients at 90 days. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00562016.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
McDonagh, T. A., Metra, M., Adamo, M., Gardner, R. S., Baumbach, A., Böhm, M., Burri, H., Butler, J., Čelutkienė, J., Chioncel, O., et al. (2021) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehab670 · Cited by 19,442
2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure
Ponikowski, P., Voors, A. A., Anker, S. D., Bueno, H., Cleland, J. G. F., Coats, A. J. S., Falk, V., González-Juanatey, J. R., Harjola, V.-P., Jankowska, E. A., et al. (2016) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehw128 · Cited by 11,429
2018 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization
Neumann, F.-J., Sousa-Uva, M., Ahlsson, A., Alfonso, F., Banning, A. P., Benedetto, U., Byrne, R. A., Collet, J.-P., Falk, V., Head, S. J., et al. (2019) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394 · Cited by 7,167
2016 ESC Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure
Ponikowski, P., Voors, A. A., Anker, S. D., Bueno, H., Cleland, J. G. F., Coats, A. J. S., Falk, V., González-Juanatey, J. R., Harjola, V.-P., Jankowska, E. A., et al. (2016) · European Journal of Heart Failure · doi:10.1002/ejhf.592 · Cited by 5,866
2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of chronic coronary syndromes
Vrints, C., Andreotti, F., Koskinas, K. C., Rossello, X., Adamo, M., Ainslie, J., Banning, A. P., Budaj, A., Buechel, R. R., Chiariello, G. A., et al. (2024) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehae177 · Cited by 2,774
Metadata
- Authors
- O'Neill, W. W., Kleiman, N. S., Moses, J., Henriques, J. P. S., Dixon, S., Massaro, J., Palacios, I., Maini, B., Mulukutla, S., Džavík, V., Popma, J., Douglas, P. S., & Ohman, M.
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 2012-10-02
- Volume
- 126
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 1717-1727
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W2038381502
- Cited by
- 878
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 19.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial of Hemodynamic Support With Impella 2.5 Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Patients Undergoing High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The PROTECT II Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.112.098194
- The paper
- O'Neill, W. W., Kleiman, N. S., Moses, J., Henriques, J. P. S., Dixon, S., Massaro, J., Palacios, I., Maini, B., Mulukutla, S., Džavík, V., Popma, J., Douglas, P. S., & Ohman, M. (2012). A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial of Hemodynamic Support With Impella 2.5 Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Patients Undergoing High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The PROTECT II Study. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.112.098194
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.