BraunwaldE. Cardiovascular Medicine at the Turn of the Millennium: Triumphs, Concerns, and Opportunities. New Engl J Med1997; 337(19): 1360–1369.
2.
SzummerKWallentinLLindhagenLAlfredssonJErlingeDHeldCet al. Improved outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction during the last 20 years are related to implementation of evidence-based treatments: experiences from the SWEDEHEART registry 1995–2014. Eur Heart J2017; 38(41): 3056–3065.
3.
MesserliFHMesserliAWLüscherTF. Eisenhower's Billion-Dollar Heart Attack — 50 Years Later. New England Journal of Medicine2005; 353(12): 1205–1207.
4.
LüscherTFObeidS. From Eisenhower’s heart attack to modern management: a true success story!Eur Heart J2017; 38(41): 3066–3069.
5.
StengaardCSørensenJTRasmussenMBSøndergaardHMDodtKKNiemannTet al. Editor’s Choice-Acute versus subacute angiography in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction – the NONSTEMI trial phase I. Eur Heart J: Acute Cardiovasc Care2017; 6(6): 490–499.
6.
RasmussenMBStengaardCSørensenJTRiddervoldISHansenTMGiebnerMet al. Predictive value of routine point-of-care cardiac troponin T measurement for prehospital diagnosis and risk-stratification in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J: Acute Cardiovasc Care2019; 8(4): 299–308.
7.
KofoedKFKelbækHHansenPRTorp-PedersenCHøfstenDKløvgaardLet al. Early Versus Standard Care Invasive Examination and Treatment of Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome. Circulation2018; 138(24): 2741–2750.
8.
MehtaSRGrangerCBBodenWEStegPGBassandJ-PFaxonDPet al. Early versus Delayed Invasive Intervention in Acute Coronary Syndromes. New Engl J Med2009; 360(21): 2165–2175.
Nepper-ChristensenLLønborgJAhtarovskiKAHøfstenDEKyhlKSchoosMMet al. Importance of elevated heart rate in the very early phase of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Results from the DANAMI-3 trial. Eur Heart J: Acute Cardiovasc Care2019; 8(4): 318–328.
11.
OuweneelDMde BrabanderJKaramiMSjauwKDEngströmAEVisMMet al. Real-life use of left ventricular circulatory support with Impella in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction: 12 years AMC experience. Eur Heart J: Acute Cardiovasc Care2019; 8(4): 338–349.
12.
SchrageBIbrahimKLoehnTWernerNSinningJ-MPappalardoFet al. Impella Support for Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock. Circulation2019; 139(10): 1249–58.
13.
SchillerPHellgrenLVikholmP. Survival after refractory cardiogenic shock is comparable in patients with Impella and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation when adjusted for SAVE score. Eur Heart J: Acute Cardiovasc Care2019; 8(4): 329–337.
14.
BecherTBaumannSEderFPerschkaSLoßnitzerDFastnerCet al. Comparison of peri and post-procedural complications in patients undergoing revascularisation of coronary artery multivessel disease by coronary artery bypass grafting or protected percutaneous coronary intervention with the Impella 2.5 device. Eur Heart J: Acute Cardiovasc Care2019; 8(4): 360–368.
15.
DoshiRSinghAJauharRMerajPM. Gender difference with the use of percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients undergoing complex high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: From pVAD Working Group. Eur Heart J: Acute Cardiovasc Care2019; 8(4): 369–378.
16.
MatteucciMFinaDJiritanoFMeaniPBlankesteijnWMRaffaGMet al. Treatment strategies for post-infarction left ventricular free-wall rupture. Eur Heart J: Acute Cardiovasc Care2019; 8(4): 379–387.