World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Holger Thiele

Holger Thiele

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
127
Citations
75991
World Ranking
2788
National Ranking
142

Holger Thiele publication distribution in Medicine in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Medicine in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Holger Thiele sits on this spectrum.

101–120 publications: 5 scientists 121–140 publications: 26 scientists 141–160 publications: 73 scientists 161–180 publications: 155 scientists 181–200 publications: 230 scientists 201–220 publications: 363 scientists 221–240 publications: 487 scientists 241–260 publications: 545 scientists 261–280 publications: 722 scientists 281–300 publications: 768 scientists 301–320 publications: 834 scientists 321–340 publications: 895 scientists 341–360 publications: 922 scientists 361–380 publications: 838 scientists 381–400 publications: 861 scientists 401–420 publications: 918 scientists 421–440 publications: 806 scientists 441–460 publications: 771 scientists 461–480 publications: 751 scientists 481–500 publications: 713 scientists 501–520 publications: 617 scientists 521–540 publications: 610 scientists 541–560 publications: 537 scientists 561–580 publications: 504 scientists 581–600 publications: 509 scientists 601–620 publications: 396 scientists 621–640 publications: 386 scientists 641–660 publications: 371 scientists 661–680 publications: 340 scientists 681–700 publications: 336 scientists 701–720 publications: 307 scientists 721–740 publications: 259 scientists 741–760 publications: 230 scientists 761–780 publications: 228 scientists 781–800 publications: 217 scientists 801–820 publications: 204 scientists 821–840 publications: 186 scientists 841–860 publications: 177 scientists 861–880 publications: 155 scientists 881–900 publications: 139 scientists 901–920 publications: 145 scientists 921–940 publications: 116 scientists 941–960 publications: 133 scientists 961–980 publications: 91 scientists 981–1,000 publications: 96 scientists 1,001–1,020 publications: 77 scientists 1,021–1,040 publications: 70 scientists 1,041–1,060 publications: 63 scientists 1,061–1,080 publications: 77 scientists 1,081–1,100 publications: 49 scientists 1,101–1,120 publications: 54 scientists 1,121–1,140 publications: 49 scientists 1,141–1,160 publications: 51 scientists 1,161–1,180 publications: 35 scientists 1,181–1,200 publications: 39 scientists 1,201–1,220 publications: 26 scientists 1,221–1,240 publications: 37 scientists 1,241–1,260 publications: 36 scientists 1,261–1,280 publications: 27 scientists 1,281–1,300 publications: 32 scientists 1,301–1,320 publications: 28 scientists 1,321–1,340 publications: 17 scientists 1,341–1,360 publications: 30 scientists 1,361–1,380 publications: 28 scientists 1,381–1,400 publications: 17 scientists 1,401–1,420 publications: 21 scientists 1,421–1,440 publications: 15 scientists 1,441–1,460 publications: 12 scientists 1,461–1,480 publications: 12 scientists 1,481–1,500 publications: 18 scientists 1,501–1,520 publications: 14 scientists 1,521–1,540 publications: 17 scientists 1,541–1,560 publications: 15 scientists 1,561–1,580 publications: 6 scientists 1,581–1,600 publications: 2 scientists 1,601–1,620 publications: 12 scientists 1,621–1,640 publications: 11 scientists 1,641–1,660 publications: 8 scientists 1,661–1,680 publications: 5 scientists 1,681–1,700 publications: 5 scientists 1,701–1,720 publications: 10 scientists 1,721–1,740 publications: 12 scientists 1,741–1,760 publications: 14 scientists 1,761–1,780 publications: 6 scientists 1,781–1,795 publications: 5 scientists 1,796+ publications: 100 scientists
101 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 1,147 publications — 97th percentile

97% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more.

Holger Thiele D-index placement in Medicine in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Holger Thiele sits on this spectrum.

70–71 D-Index: 226 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 391 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 574 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 730 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 891 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 972 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 1,027 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 1,003 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 960 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 970 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 922 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 839 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 808 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 779 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 668 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 611 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 630 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 513 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 541 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 445 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 429 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 399 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 393 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 318 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 302 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 287 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 255 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 256 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 252 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 230 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 179 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 168 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 163 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 159 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 134 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 134 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 118 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 109 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 106 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 74 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 79 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 80 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 87 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 57 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 74 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 69 scientists 162–163 D-Index: 60 scientists 164–165 D-Index: 53 scientists 166–167 D-Index: 39 scientists 168–169 D-Index: 42 scientists 170–171 D-Index: 32 scientists 172–173 D-Index: 39 scientists 174–175 D-Index: 40 scientists 176–177 D-Index: 28 scientists 178–179 D-Index: 19 scientists 180–181 D-Index: 23 scientists 182–183 D-Index: 31 scientists 184–185 D-Index: 18 scientists 186–187 D-Index: 20 scientists 188–189 D-Index: 22 scientists 190–191 D-Index: 13 scientists 192–193 D-Index: 21 scientists 194–195 D-Index: 12 scientists 196–197 D-Index: 12 scientists 198–199 D-Index: 14 scientists 200–201 D-Index: 15 scientists 202–203 D-Index: 13 scientists 204–205 D-Index: 10 scientists 206–207 D-Index: 8 scientists 208–209 D-Index: 4 scientists 210–211 D-Index: 12 scientists 212–213 D-Index: 11 scientists 214–215 D-Index: 10 scientists 216 D-Index: 4 scientists 217+ D-Index: 98 scientists
70 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 127 D-Index — 86th percentile

86% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more.

Overview

Holger Thiele is affiliated with Leipzig University in Germany and has contributed extensively to the field of medicine, with a particular focus on cardiology and cardiovascular medicine. Their work spans over 1,700 publications in medicine, including 783 dedicated to cardiology and cardiovascular medicine.

Their research areas include subfields such as surgery, biomedical engineering, emergency medicine, and radiology, nuclear medicine, and imaging. This multidisciplinary approach supports a broad investigation into cardiovascular health and treatment innovations.

Main topics addressed in their research comprise:

  • Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
  • Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
  • Cardiac Structural Anomalies and Repair
  • Cardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
  • Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
  • Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
  • Infective Endocarditis Diagnosis and Management

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Holger Thiele include:

  • Steffen Desch
  • Philipp Lurz
  • Ingo Eitel
  • Mohamed Abdel-Wahab
  • Uwe Zeymer

The majority of their research has been disseminated through several prominent journals, including:

  • European Heart Journal
  • JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Clinical Research in Cardiology
  • EuroIntervention

Selected recent publications by Holger Thiele include:

  • Extracorporeal Life Support in Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock, 2023, New England Journal of Medicine
  • 2023 ESC Guidelines for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes, 2023, European Heart Journal
  • SCAI SHOCK Stage Classification Expert Consensus Update: A Review and Incorporation of Validation Studies, 2022, Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • 2020 ESC Guidelines for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation, 2020, European Heart Journal
  • 2020 ESC Guidelines for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation, 2021, Russian Journal of Cardiology

Best Publications

  • 2020 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation

    Jean-Philippe Collet;Holger Thiele;Emanuele Barbato;Olivier Barthélémy

  • Intraaortic Balloon Support for Myocardial Infarction with Cardiogenic Shock

    Holger Thiele;Uwe Zeymer;Franz-Josef Neumann;Miroslaw Ferenc

  • Clinical Features and Outcomes of Takotsubo (Stress) Cardiomyopathy

    Christian Templin;Jelena R. Ghadri;Johanna Diekmann;L. Christian Napp

  • Fibrinolysis for Patients with Intermediate- Risk Pulmonary Embolism

    Guy Meyer;Eric Vicaut;Thierry Danays;Giancarlo Agnelli

  • Contemporary Management of Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

    Sean van Diepen;Jason N. Katz;Nancy M. Albert;Timothy D. Henry

  • Regular Physical Activity Improves Endothelial Function in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease by Increasing Phosphorylation of Endothelial Nitric Oxide Synthase

    R. Hambrecht;V. Adams;S. Erbs;A. Linke

  • Antithrombotic Therapy after Acute Coronary Syndrome or PCI in Atrial Fibrillation

    R.D. Lopes;G. Heizer;R. Aronson;A.N. Vora

  • PCI Strategies in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock

    Holger Thiele;Ibrahim Akin;Marcus Sandri;Georg Fuernau

  • Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (IABP-SHOCK II): final 12 month results of a randomised, open-label trial

    Holger Thiele;Uwe Zeymer;Franz-Josef Neumann;Miroslaw Ferenc

  • SCAI clinical expert consensus statement on the classification of cardiogenic shock: This document was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) in April 2019

    David A. Baran;Cindy L. Grines;Steven Bailey;Daniel Burkhoff

  • Randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon support with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients with revascularized acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock

    Holger Thiele;Peter Sick;Enno Boudriot;Klaus-Werner Diederich

  • Normal human left and right ventricular dimensions for MRI as assessed by turbo gradient echo and steady-state free precession imaging sequences.

    Khaled Alfakih;Sven Plein;Holger Thiele;Tim Jones

  • Clinical picture and risk prediction of short-term mortality in cardiogenic shock.

    Veli-Pekka Harjola;Johan Lassus;Alessandro Sionis;Lars Køber

  • Relationship Between Infarct Size and Outcomes Following Primary PCI: Patient-Level Analysis From 10 Randomized Trials

    Gregg W. Stone;Harry P. Selker;Holger Thiele;Manesh R. Patel

  • Randomized Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Unprotected Left Main Stem Stenosis

    Enno Boudriot;Holger Thiele;Thomas Walther;Christoph Liebetrau

  • Recessive mutations in DGKE cause atypical hemolytic-uremic syndrome

    Mathieu Lemaire;Véronique Frémeaux-Bacchi;Franz Schaefer;Murim Choi

  • Mutations in GRIN2A cause idiopathic focal epilepsy with rolandic spikes

    Johannes R Lemke;Dennis Lal;Eva M Reinthaler;Isabelle Steiner

  • Management of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: an update 2019

    Holger Thiele;E Magnus Ohman;Suzanne de Waha-Thiele;Uwe Zeymer

  • Management of cardiogenic shock

    Holger Thiele;E Magnus Ohman;Steffen Desch;Ingo Eitel

  • Impella Support for Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.

    Benedikt Schrage;Karim Ibrahim;Tobias Loehn;Nikos Werner

Frequent Co-Authors

Ingo Eitel
Ingo Eitel University of Lübeck
Steffen Desch
Steffen Desch Leipzig University
Gerhard Schuler
Gerhard Schuler Leipzig University
Janine Altmüller
Janine Altmüller University of Cologne
Peter Nürnberg
Peter Nürnberg University of Cologne
Uwe Zeymer
Uwe Zeymer University of Göttingen
Michael A. Borger
Michael A. Borger Leipzig University
Axel Linke
Axel Linke TU Dresden
Rainer Hambrecht
Rainer Hambrecht University of Lübeck
Stephan Windecker
Stephan Windecker University of Bern

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

Exploring a career in medicine doesn’t always mean following the traditional route to becoming a doctor. Today, there are numerous online programs that offer flexible and fast entry into healthcare fields for students with varying interests and backgrounds.

For non-nurses interested in advanced practice, direct entry online MSN programs allow you to earn a Master of Science in Nursing without a previous nursing degree. These programs are ideal for career changers who want to quickly transition into nursing leadership roles.

Some students may prefer to begin their journey with programs known for accessibility, such as direct admit nursing programs. These options typically offer fewer barriers to entry and more streamlined admissions.

If you’re interested in healthcare administration, medical coding and billing classes online with financial aid are a popular path to enter the field quickly and affordably.

For those considering practical nursing, enrolling in an lpn school without teas test makes it easier to start your healthcare career without additional standardized testing barriers.

Best Scientists Citing Holger Thiele

Trending Scientists