Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) has been the most commonly used mechanical assist circulatory device in many postcardiotomy low output disorders for decades. Mechanism of IABP is based on its inflation in time of the diastolic pressure in the aortic root resulting increase in the blood and oxygen amount of the coronary artery and its deflation in left ventricular afterload during the systolic period. Prophylactic and postoperative application of IABP has been suggested by researchers, which has been commonly used in high-risk patients undertaking coronary artery bypass grafting surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention. Other researchers put forward the idea of the percutaneous IABP insertion throughout the left axillary artery as a reliable and relatively well-tolerated approach and also as a recovery tool to bridge patients with end-stage heart failure to heart transplantation. The current review was aimed to give further insight into routine IABP application by presenting the basic principles and trends in the incidence, management, role of IABP recovery, and long-lasting mortality outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disorders and discussing previous and current evidence.

Background: Paraquat (PQ) poisoning is a serious public health problem in many countries. In spite of different treatments, the mortality is still high. We performed a meta-analysis to see whether hemoperfusion (HP) in combination with other treatments reduces the mortality more than HP alone in patients with PQ poisoning. Materials and Methods: We searched EMBASE, PubMed, Google Scholar, ISI Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Springer, TRIP, ProQuest, and references of the included studies from January 2000 to August 2017. Two reviewers independently searched and extracted data. We measured I² to determine variance contributed by heterogeneity. To investigate the publication bias, Begg's and Egger's tests were used along with funnel plot analysis. Results: Ultimately 12 articles were included in the meta-analysis. Five articles compared HP with conventional therapy with a total of 1311 patients, and seven articles compared mortality of patients received HP versus those received HP in combination with an additional treatment. HP alone reduced the odds of death (odds ratio [OR] = 0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.11–0.40, P < 0.0001) compared to conventional therapy. Furthermore, the odds of death was higher in HP group compared to those received HP in combination of additional treatments (OR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.05–1.46, P= 0.01). Conclusion: The mortality was less in HP-treated group compared to those received only conventional therapy. Addition of other treatments with HP reduced the mortality more than HP alone.