Acute cardiac care & resuscitationResearch article
Comparative Outcomes of Transferred vs Nontransferred Cardiogenic Shock Patients Receiving Impella Support
- National Inpatient Sample 2016 to 2021
- propensity score-based analysis
Authors' conclusion
In this study, transfer status was associated with similar in-hospital mortality but higher complication rates, greater use of additional tMCS, and increased resource utilization.
Study context
- Population
- Cardiogenic shock patients receiving Impella supportpatients who received Impella for cardiogenic shock (CS), 28.3% transferred from other hospitals
- Participants
- 11,264 patients
- Comparison
- transferred and nontransferred CS patients receiving Impella support
- Outcome
- In-hospital mortality
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
P = 0.589
Secondary outcomes
Acute myocardial infarction at presentation
- Acute myocardial infarction at presentation
- Sixteen percent
Utilization of intra-aortic balloon pump and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation
- Higher utilization with transfer status
- These associations persisted with propensity score-based analysis.
Hospital stay and hospitalization costs
- Longer hospital stays and higher hospitalization costs with transfer status
- These associations persisted with propensity score-based analysis.
Safety
Acute renal failure · higher with transfer
P < 0.001
Renal replacement therapy · higher with transfer
P < 0.001
- Acute renal failure: These associations persisted with propensity score-based analysis.
- Renal replacement therapy: These associations persisted with propensity score-based analysis.
Original publication
Comparative Outcomes of Transferred vs Nontransferred Cardiogenic Shock Patients Receiving Impella Support. JACC Adv. Published 21 April 2026. doi:10.1016/j.jacadv.2026.102739
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it