Acute cardiac care & resuscitation
Bleeding in Patients With Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock: A DanGer Shock Substudy
Authors' conclusion
Patients randomized to mAFP experienced more bleeding than the standard care group. Bleeding was associated with the complexity of MCS, with one-half of the bleeding events occurring after device removal.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with STEMI and cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS)
- Participants
- 355 patients
- Comparison
- Microaxial flow pump (mAFP) vs standard care alone
- mAFPn = 179
- Standard caren = 176reference
- Primary endpoint
- BARC type 3-5 bleeding
Methodological detailsinternational, multicenter
- International
- Multicenter
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
P < 0.001
Further findings
| Outcome | OR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| BARC 3-5 bleeding by MCS device (no device as reference)mAFP vs No device | 4.94 (2.30–10.65) | P < 0.001 | |
| BARC 3-5 bleeding by MCS device (no device as reference)VA-ECMO vs No device | 8.06 (2.81–23.09) | P < 0.001 | |
| BARC 3-5 bleeding by MCS device (no device as reference)mAFP+VA-ECMO vs No device | 27.40 (9.82–76.43) | P < 0.001 | |
| 0.050.21520Odds ratio (log scale) |
Timing of bleeding events among patients treated with any mechanical circulatory support (MCS) (n = 210; 74 bleeding events)
- In cath lab
- 2 (2.7%)
- While on MCS
- 35 (47.3%)
- After MCS removed
- 37 (50.0%)
Predictors of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3-5 bleeding (multivariable logistic regression)
- Use of mAFP, renal replacement therapy and escalation to venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) identified as predictors
Original publication
Bleeding in Patients With Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock: A DanGer Shock Substudy. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Published 9 February 2026. doi:10.
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it