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

Management of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: A review

Despite advances in percutaneous coronary interventions and their widespread use, mortality in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (MI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) has remained very high, and treatment options are limited. Limited evidences exist, supporting many of the routinely used therapies in treating these patients. In the present article, we discuss CS complicating MI in general and an update on the currently available treatment options, including inotropes and vasopressor, coronary revascularization, mechanical circulatory support devices, mechanical complications, and long‐term outcomes.

Mechanical circulatory support with Impella versus intra-aortic balloon pump or medical treatment in cardiogenic shock-a critical appraisal of current data

AIMS

Patients suffering from cardiogenic shock (CS) have a high mortality and morbidity. The Impella percutaneous left-ventricular assist device (LVAD) decreases LV preload, increases cardiac output, and improves coronary blood flow. We aimed to review and meta-analyze available data comparing Impella versus intra-aortic pump (IABP) counterpulsation or medical treatment in CS due to acute myocardial infarction or post-cardiac arrest.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Study-level data were analyzed. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Risk rates were calculated and obtained using a random-effects model (DerSimonian and Laird). Four studies were found suitable for the final analysis, including 588 patients. Primary endpoint was short-term mortality (in-hospital or 30-day mortality). In a meta-analysis of four studies comparing Impella versus control, Impella was not associated with improved short-term mortality (in-hospital or 30-day mortality; RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.57-1.24; p = 0.38; I² 55%). Stroke risk was not increased (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.36-2.81; p = 1.00; I²2 0%), but risk for major bleeding (RR 3.11 95% CI 1.50-6.44; p = 0.002; I² 0%) and peripheral ischemia complications (RR 2.58; 95% CI 1.24-5.34; p = 0.01; I² 0%) were increased in the Impella group.

CONCLUSION

In patients suffering from severe CS due to AMI, the use of Impella is not associated with improved short-time survival but with higher complications rates compared to IABP and medical treatment. Better patient selection avoiding Impella implantation in futile situations or in possible lower risk CS might be necessary to elucidate possible advantages of Impella in future studies.

Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices for Cardiogenic Shock: State of the Art

This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2019. Other selected articles can be found online at https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/annualupdate2019 . Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from http://www.springer.com/series/8901 .

Mechanical Circulatory Support in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory for Cardiogenic Shock

Despite the development of acute revascularisation, the mortality rate for cardiogenic shock remains around 50%. Mechanical circulatory support devices have long held promise in improving outcomes in shock, but high-quality evidence of benefit has not been forthcoming. In this article we review the currently available devices for treating shock, their physiological effects and the evidence base for their use in practice. We subsequently look ahead within this developing field, including new devices and novel indications for established technology.

Epidemiology of Shock in Contemporary Cardiac Intensive Care Units

Background Clinical investigations of shock in cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) have primarily focused on acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS). Few studies have evaluated the full spectrum of shock in contemporary CICUs. Methods and Results The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter network of advanced CICUs in North America. Anytime between September 2017 and September 2018, each center (n=16) contributed a 2-month snap-shot of all consecutive medical admissions to the CICU. Data were submitted to the central coordinating center (TIMI Study Group, Boston, MA). Shock was defined as sustained systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg with end-organ dysfunction ascribed to the hypotension. Shock type was classified by site investigators as cardiogenic, distributive, hypovolemic, or mixed. Among 3049 CICU admissions, 677 (22%) met clinical criteria for shock. Shock type was varied, with 66% assessed as cardiogenic shock (CS), 7% as distributive, 3% as hypovolemic, 20% as mixed, and 4% as unknown. Among patients with CS (n=450), 30% had AMICS, 18% had ischemic cardiomyopathy without AMI, 28% had nonischemic cardiomyopathy, and 17% had a cardiac cause other than primary myocardial dysfunction. Patients with mixed shock had cardiovascular comorbidities similar to patients with CS. The median CICU stay was 4.0 days (interquartile range [IQR], 2.5-8.1 days) for AMICS, 4.3 days (IQR, 2.1-8.5 days) for CS not related to AMI, and 5.8 days (IQR, 2.9-10.0 days) for mixed shock versus 1.9 days (IQR, 1.0-3.6) for patients without shock ( P<0.01 for each). Median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were higher in patients with mixed shock (10; IQR, 6-13) versus AMICS (8; IQR, 5-11) or CS without AMI (7; IQR, 5-11; each P<0.01). In-hospital mortality rates were 36% (95% CI, 28%-45%), 31% (95% CI, 26%-36%), and 39% (95% CI, 31%-48%) in AMICS, CS without AMI, and mixed shock, respectively. Conclusions The epidemiology of shock in contemporary advanced CICUs is varied, and AMICS now represents less than one-third of all CS. Despite advanced therapies, mortality in CS and mixed shock remains high. Investigation of management strategies and new therapies to treat shock in the CICU should take this epidemiology into account.

The Effect of Simultaneous Renal Replacement Therapy on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support for Postcardiotomy Patients with Cardiogenic Shock: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to determine the feasibility and safety of simultaneous renal replacement therapy (RRT) during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support for postcardiotomy patients with cardiogenic shock and whether simultaneous RRT with ECMO would improve survival and reduce morbidity. The authors hypothesized that simultaneous RRT could facilitate effective fluid management and rapid metabolic control in postcardiotomy patients with cardiogenic shock who were undergoing ECMO support.

DESIGN

A parallel, open-label, single-center pilot randomized trial.

SETTING

University-affiliated cardiac surgery intensive care unit.

PARTICIPANTS

The study comprised 41 postcardiotomy patients with cardiogenic shock who received ECMO support.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were enrolled and randomly assigned via a 1:1 allocation to a simultaneous RRT arm versus a standard care arm. The patients in the simultaneous RRT arm received RRT within 12 hours of the start of ECMO regardless of the conventional RRT indication. Simultaneous RRT was delivered with the RRT machine connected to the ECMO circuit. The patients in the standard care arm did not receive RRT at the start of ECMO unless the conventional RRT indications were fulfilled.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

All 41 patients enrolled were followed-up for 30 days and the results analyzed. The primary feasibility outcome was the time from randomization to simultaneous RRT of <12 hours in the simultaneous RRT arm. All participants in simultaneous RRT arm fulfilled with a median time from randomization to simultaneous RRT of 4.4 (2.7-5.6) hours. The 30-day all-cause mortality was 61.9% in the simultaneous RRT arm and 75.0% in the standard care arm (p = 0.51). The lactate clearance was higher in the simultaneous RRT arm (0.56 ± 0.4 v 0.28 ± 0.4 mmol/L/h; p = 0.04). There was lower cumulative fluid balance in the simultaneous RRT arm on ECMO day 3 (-1,510 [-3560 to 1,162] v -332 [-2,027 to 2,181]; p = 0.38) and ECMO day 5 (-2,671 [-5,197 to 3,334] v -1,509 [-3,595 to 1,162]; p = 0.41) without significance. There were no significant differences in adverse events reported and no hemodynamic instability owing to simultaneous RRT delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study suggests the feasibility and safety of simultaneous RRT during ECMO support for postcardiotomy patients with cardiogenic shock, providing an efficient means for controlling fluid status and metabolics. A large trial based on this pilot study is required to confirm the clinical benefits.

Chinese society of cardiology expert consensus statement on the diagnosis and treatment of adult fulminant myocarditis

Fulminant myocarditis is primarily caused by infection with any number of a variety of viruses. It arises quickly, progresses rapidly, and may lead to severe heart failure or circulatory failure presenting as rapid-onset hypotension and cardiogenic shock, with mortality rates as high as 50%-70%. Most importantly, there are no treatment options, guidelines or an expert consensus statement. Here, we provide the first expert consensus, the Chinese Society of Cardiology Expert Consensus Statement on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Fulminant Myocarditis, based on data from our recent clinical trial (NCT03268642). In this statement, we describe the clinical features and diagnostic criteria of fulminant myocarditis, and importantly, for the first time, we describe a new treatment regimen termed life support-based comprehensive treatment regimen. The core content of this treatment regimen includes (i) mechanical life support (applications of mechanical respirators and circulatory support systems, including intraaortic balloon pump and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, (ii) immunological modulation by using sufficient doses of glucocorticoid, immunoglobulin and (iii) antiviral reagents using neuraminidase inhibitor. The proper application of this treatment regimen may and has helped to save the lives of many patients with fulminant myocarditis.

Trends, Predictors, and Outcomes of Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support for Postcardiac Surgery Cardiogenic Shock

Postcardiac surgery cardiogenic shock (PCCS) is seen in 2% to 6% of patients who undergo cardiac surgery. There are limited large-scale data on the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in these patients. This study sought to evaluate the in-hospital mortality, trends, and resource utilization for PCCS admissions with and without MCS. A retrospective cohort of PCCS between 2005 and 2014 with and without the use of temporary MCS was identified from the National Inpatient Sample. Admissions for permanent MCS and heart transplant were excluded. Propensity-matching for baseline characteristics was performed. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes included trends in use, hospital costs and lengths of stay. In the period between 2005 and 2014, there were 132,485 admissions with PCCS, with 51.3% requiring MCS. The intra-aortic balloon pump was the predominant device used with a steady increase in other devices. MCS use for more frequent in younger patients, males and those with higher co-morbidity. There was a decrease in MCS use across all demographic categories and hospital characteristics over time. Older age, female sex, previous cardiovascular morbidity and MCS use were independently predictive of higher in-hospital mortality. In 6,830 propensity-matched pairs, PCCS admissions that required MCS use, had higher in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 2.4; p<0.001), higher hospital costs ($98,759 ± 907 vs $81,099 ± 698; p<0.001) but not a longer length of stay compared with those without MCS use. In conclusion, in patients with PCCS, this study noted a steady decrease in MCS use. Use of MCS identified PCCS patients at higher risk for in-hospital mortality and greater resource utilization.

A Long-Forgotten Tale: The Management of Cardiogenic Shock in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated with cardiogenic shock (CS) present one of the highest mortality rates recorded in critical care. Mortality rate in this setting is reported around 45-50% even in the most experienced and well-equipped medical centers. The continuous development of ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) networks has led not only to a dramatic decrease in STEMI-related mortality, but also to an increase in the frequency of severely complicated cases who survive to be transferred to tertiary centers for life-saving treatments. The reduced effectiveness of vasoactive drugs on a severely altered hemodynamic status led to the development of new devices dedicated to advanced cardiac support. What’s more, efforts are being made to reduce time from first medical contact to initiation of mechanical support in this particular clinical context. This review aims to summarize the most recent advances in mechanical support devices, in the setting of CS-complicated AMI. At the same time, the review presents several modern concepts in the organization of complex CS centers. These specialized hubs could improve survival in this critical condition.

[Therapy of cardiogenic shock : A success story of German cardiology]

In contrast to the situation in the 1960s and 1970s, the mortality risk for patients with myocardial infarction has been clearly reduced, particularly for those with myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock (MICS). Approximately 5‑10 % of patients with a myocardial infarction are affected by a MICS and the mortality risk is between 30 % and 50 %. The primary percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation should be carried out as quickly as possible in order to reduce the mortality to around 20 %. This article gives an overview of the currently available options for conservative and fibrinolytic treatment of MICS, of the interventional treatment of cardiogenic shock in the era of intravenous and intracoronary infarct treatment as well as without thrombolysis. In addition, the currently available mechanical support systems and the possibilities for surveillance and monitoring of patients are presented.

Predicting mortality in patients undergoing VA-ECMO after coronary artery bypass grafting: the REMEMBER score

Background

Prediction scoring systems for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients on venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) have not yet been reported. This study was designed to develop a predictive score for in-hospital mortality for cardiogenic shock patients who received VA-ECMO after isolated CABG.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study of consecutive CABG patients supported with VA-ECMO (n = 166) at the Beijing Anzhen Hospital between February 2004 and March 2017.

Results

One hundred and six patients (64%) could be weaned from VA-ECMO, and 74 patients (45%) survived to hospital discharge. On the basis of multivariable logistic regression analyses, the pRedicting mortality in patients undergoing veno-arterial Extracorporeal MEMBrane oxygenation after coronary artEry bypass gRafting (REMEMBER) score was created with six pre-ECMO parameters: older age, left main coronary artery disease, inotropic score > 75, CK-MB > 130 IU/L, serum creatinine > 150 umol/L, and platelet count < 100 × 10⁹/L. Four risk classes, namely class I (REMEMBER score 0–13), class II (14–19), class III (20–25), and class IV (> 25) with their corresponding mortality (13%, 55%, 70%, and 94%, respectively), were identified. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.85(95% CI 0.79–0.91) for the REMEMBER score was better than those for the SOFA, SAVE, EuroSCORE, and ENCOURAGE scores in this population.

Conclusions

The REMEMBER score might help clinicians at bedside to predict in-hospital mortality for patients receiving VA-ECMO after isolated CABG for refractory cardiogenic shock. Prospective studies are needed to externally validate this scoring system.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-019-2307-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Inter-hospital transfer of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-assisted patients: the hub and spoke network

Background

The treatment of cardiogenic shock (CS) in peripheral hospitals may be challenging when acute mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is not available. Tertiary care centers may provide mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) teams to support the treatment of CS-patients externally.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed our single-center experience with a mobile ECMO team focussing on decision-making and survival data of CS-patients retrieved by ECMO support from peripheral hospitals to our tertiary care center between January 2012 and October 2018.

Results

A total number of 134 CS-patients have been retrieved by ECMO support to our center within the observation period. Forty-three (32%) died on the acute MCS device, while 59 (44%) patients could be weaned from the acute MCS. Twenty-nine (22%) were bridged to implantation of a durable MCS system and 6 were finally transplanted. The overall 1-year survival was 33%. Interestingly, advanced patient age did not significantly affect survival.

Conclusions

Acute MCS for CS may be provided by experienced mobile teams allowing for retrieval of patients from peripheral hospitals to tertiary care centers. Relatively low survival rates oppose intensive material and human resources. It is therefore mandatory to constantly refine logistics and selection criteria.

Acute Coronary Syndrome With Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Culprit - An Observation From the AOI-LMCA Registry

BACKGROUND

Data on the clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are limited. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the clinical outcome of patients with ACS who underwent PCI for LMCA culprit lesion.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Of 1,809 patients enrolled in the Assessing Optimal Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for the LMCA (AOI-LMCA) registry (a retrospective 6-center registry of consecutive patients undergoing LMCA stenting in Japan), the current study population consisited of 1,500 patients with unprotected LMCA stenting for LMCA ACS (ACS with shock: 115 patients, ACS without shock: 281 patients) and stable CAD (1,104 patients). The cumulative 180-day incidence of death was markedly higher in the ACS with shock group than in the other groups (49.5%, 8.6%, and 3.3%, respectively; P<0.0001), but mortality beyond 180-day was not significantly different among the 3 groups (30.2%, 20.4%, and 19.5%, respectively; P=0.65). In the ACS with shock group, the initial TIMI flow grade did not affect 5-year mortality (57.1% and 62.2%, P=0.99), but in the ACS without shock group, 5-year mortality was significantly higher in patients with initial TIMI flow grade ≤1 than in patients with TIMI flow grade ≥2 (44.4% and 23.7%, respectively; P=0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with LMCA ACS, survival correlates with baseline hemodynamic and coronary flow status.

Circulating levels of microRNA 423-5p are associated with 90 day mortality in cardiogenic shock

AIMS

The role of microRNAs has not been studied in cardiogenic shock. We examined the potential role of miR-423-5p level to predict mortality and associations of miR-423-5p with prognostic markers in cardiogenic shock.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a prospective multinational observational study enrolling consecutive cardiogenic shock patients. Blood samples were available for 179 patients at baseline to determine levels of miR-423-5p and other biomarkers. Patients were treated according to local practice. Main outcome was 90 day all-cause mortality. Median miR-423-5p level was significantly higher in 90 day non-survivors [median 0.008 arbitrary units (AU) (interquartile range 0.003-0.017) vs. 0.004 AU (0.002-0.009), P = 0.003]. miR-423-5p level above median was associated with higher lactate (median 3.7 vs. 2.4 mmol/L, P = 0.001) and alanine aminotransferase levels (median 68 vs. 35 IU/L, P < 0.001) as well as lower cardiac index (1.8 vs. 2.4, P = 0.04) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (56 vs. 70 mL/min/1.73 m² , P = 0.002). In Cox regression analysis, miR-423-5p level above median was associated with 90 day all-cause mortality independently of established risk factors of cardiogenic shock [adjusted hazard ratio 1.9 (95% confidence interval 1.2-3.2), P = 0.01].

CONCLUSIONS

In cardiogenic shock patients, above median level of miR-423-5p at baseline is associated with markers of hypoperfusion and seems to independently predict 90 day all-cause mortality.

Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support for Refractory Cardiogenic Shock Before Left Ventricular Assist Device Surgery

Background There are limited data on the role of temporary mechanical circulatory support ( MCS ) devices for cardiogenic shock before left ventricular assist device ( LVAD ) surgery. This study sought to evaluate the trends of use and outcomes of MCS in cardiogenic shock before LVAD surgery. Methods and Results This was a retrospective cohort study from 2005 to 2014 using the National Inpatient Sample (20% stratified sample of US hospitals). This study identified admissions undergoing LVAD surgery with preoperative cardiogenic shock. Admissions for other cardiac surgery and heart transplant were excluded. Temporary MCS was identified using administrative codes. The primary outcome was hospital mortality and secondary outcomes were hospital costs and lengths of stay in admissions with and without MCS use. In this 10-year period, 9753 admissions were identified with 40.6% requiring pre- LVAD MCS . There was a temporal increase in the frequency of cardiogenic shock associated with an increase in non-intra-aortic balloon pump MCS devices. The cohort receiving MCS had greater in-hospital myocardial infarction, ventricular arrhythmias, and use of coronary angiography. On multivariable analysis, older age, myocardial infarction, and need for MCS devices were independently predictive of higher in-hospital mortality. In 696 propensity-matched pairs, use of MCS was predictive of higher in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 1.4 [95% confidence interval 1.1-1.6]; P=0.02) and higher hospital costs, but similar lengths of stay. Conclusions In patients with cardiogenic shock bridged to LVAD therapy, there was a steady increase in preoperative MCS use. Use of MCS identified patients at higher risk for in-hospital mortality and greater resource utilization.

Fleckenstein's hypothesis revisited: excessive myocardial calcification after prolonged high dose catecholamine treatment: a case report

BACKGROUND

Myocardial calcification after prolonged highly dosed catecholamine treatment has been described experimentally. Here, we demonstrate myocardial calcifications by high-dose catecholamine treatment leading to chronic heart failure in patients.

CASE SUMMARY

A 62-year-old Caucasian woman presented with central pulmonary embolism, developing acute heart failure, and cardiogenic shock. Twenty-six days of high-dose norepinephrine treatment had to be administered to maintain circulation. After 74 days of intensive care treatment, the patient fortunately recovered but was readmitted to emergency ward because of dyspnoea and congestion. Computed tomography pulmonary angiography ruled out recurrence of pulmonary embolism, but depicted massive intramural cardiac calcifications, which were not present before treatment. Coronary angiography showed normal coronary arteries, and myocardial biopsy excluded infectious myocarditis. There was no evidence for sarcoidosis, thyroid disease, tuberculosis, or hyperparathyroidism. Oral heart failure treatment was initiated and at the 7 week follow-up the patient remained symptomatic with New York Heart Association functional Class III, while right and left ventricular function had recovered.

DISCUSSION

Prolonged activation of the heart by catecholamines leading to myocardial calcifications has first been examined experimentally by Fleckenstein et al. Herein, we are able to show, that this can occur in clinical situations. Careful dosing of catecholamines and early use of non-catecholamine-based haemodynamic support is recommended to avoid consecutive impairment of heart function and heart failure.

Predictors of Outcomes in Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock

Myocardial infarction (MI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (MI-CS) is a major cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Predictors of outcomes in MI-CS include clinical, laboratory, radiologic variables, and management strategies. This article reviews the existing literature on short- and long-term predictors and risk stratification in MI complicated by CS.

A Targeted Management Approach to Cardiogenic Shock

Cardiogenic shock is a clinical syndrome characterized by low cardiac output and sustained tissue hypoperfusion resulting in end-organ dysfunction and death. In-hospital mortality rates range from 50% to 60%. Urgent diagnosis, timely transfer to a tertiary or quaternary medical facility with critical care management capabilities and multidisciplinary shock teams is a must to increase survival. Aggressive, hemodynamically guided medical management with careful monitoring of clinical and hemodynamic parameters with timely use of appropriate mechanical circulatory support devices is often necessary. As treatment options evolve, prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to define best practices that define superior clinical outcomes.

Percutaneous support of the failing left and right ventricle-recommendations for the use of mechanical device therapy

Patients in cardiogenic shock and acute heart failure show high mortality and morbidity despite aggressive and invasive methods such as percutaneous coronary intervention and the use of mechanical support devices. Percutaneous implantation of active hemodynamic support is often the only option for hemodynamic stabilization of patients in cardiogenic shock. Therefore, current guidelines support the use of these devices. Standardized protocols and clinical algorithms for the use of these support devices decrease mortality in these patients. The aim of this review is an overview of current therapies of cardiogenic shock with special focus on mechanical support devices and the suggestion of a clinical algorithm for the differential use of current devices as well as the hemodynamic monitoring of such patients in order to reduce mortality in cardiogenic shock.

How New Support Devices Change Critical Care Delivery

Mechanical support devices are used to support failing cardiac, respiratory, or both systems. Since Gibbon developed the cardiopulmonary bypass in 1953, collaborative efforts by medical centers, bioengineers, industry, and the National Institutes of Health have led to development of mechanical devices to support heart, lung, or both. These devices are used as a temporary or long-term measures for acute collapse of circulatory system and/or respiratory failure. Patients are managed on these support devices as a bridge to recovery, bridge to long term devices, or bridge to transplant. The progress in development of these devices has improved mortality and quality of life in select groups of patients. Care of these patients requires a multidisciplinary team approach, which includes cardiac surgeons, critical care physicians, cardiologists, pulmonologists, nursing staff, and perfusionists. Using a team approach improves outcomes in these patients.

Management of advanced heart failure: a review

INTRODUCTION

Heart failure (HF) has become a global pandemic. Despite recent developments in both medical and device treatments, HF incidences continues to increase. The current definition of HF restricts itself to stages at which clinical symptoms are apparent. In advanced heart failure (AdHF), it is universally accepted that all patients are refractory to traditional therapies. As the number of HF patients increase, so does the need for additional treatments, with an increased proportion of patients requiring advanced therapies. Areas covered: This review discusses extensive evidence for the effect of medical treatment on HF, although the data on the effect on AdHF is scare. Authors review the relevant literature for treating AdHF patients. Furthermore, mechanical circulatory devices (MCD) have emerged as an alternative to heart transplantation and have been shown to enhance quality of life and reduce mortality therefore authors also review the current literature on the different MCD and technologies. Expert commentary: More patients will need advanced therapies, as the access to heart transplantation is limited by the number of available donors. AdHF patients should be identified timely since the window of opportunities for advanced therapy is narrow as their morbidity is progressive and survival is often short.

Management of cardiogenic shock in acute decompensated chronic heart failure: The ALTSHOCK phase II clinical trial

Management of acute decompensated heart failure patients presenting with cardiogenic shock (CS) is not straightforward, as few data are available from clinical trials. Stabilization before left ventricle assist device (LVAD) or heart transplantation (HTx) is strongly advocated, as patients undergoing LVAD implant or HTx in critical status have worse outcomes. This was a multicenter phase II study with a Simon 2-stage design, including 24 consecutive patients treated with low-moderate epinephrine doses, whose refractory CS prompted implantation of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) which was subsequently upgraded with peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. At admission, patients had severe left ventricular dysfunction and overt CS, 7 patients could be managed only with inotropic therapy, and 16 patients were transitioned to IABP and 1 to IABP and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; the median duration of epinephrine therapy was 7 days (interquartile range 6-15), and the median dose was 0.08 μg/kg/min (interquartile range 0.05-0.1); 21 patients (87.5%) survived at 60 days (primary outcome); among them, 13 (61.9%) underwent LVAD implantation, 2 (9.5%) underwent HTx, and 6 (28.6%) improved on medical treatment, indicating that early and intensive treatment of CS in chronic advanced heart failure patients with low-dose epinephrine and timely short-term mechanical circulatory support leads to satisfactory outcomes.

Evolving Concepts in Diagnosis and Management of Cardiogenic Shock

Despite efforts at early revascularization in acute coronary syndrome and advancing technologies in the field of temporary mechanical circulatory support (TMCS), the mortality from cardiogenic shock (CS) remains very high. Treatment of these patients involves understanding the trajectory of the condition and making complex decisions regarding the appropriate selection of medical and device therapies. The current definition of CS is not universally applicable and defines shock in absolute terms. CS should be thought of as a continuum rather than a binary diagnosis and is best defined as a clinical syndrome of tissue hypoperfusion resulting from cardiac dysfunction. Early intervention with appropriate timing and selection of apposite TMCS device may be the key to improving outcomes. TMCS device selection is a complex process requiring consideration of the severity of CS, patient-specific risks, technical limitations, overall goals of care, and assessment of futility of care. In this review, we discuss identification and pathophysiology of CS, and critically review acute management strategies, both medical and mechanical therapies and outline areas that need further investigation.

Levosimendan for Perioperative Cardioprotection: Myth or Reality?

BACKGROUND

Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer drug causing increased contractility in the myocardium and vasodilation in the vascular system. It is mainly used for the therapy of acute decompensated heart failure. Several studies on animals and humans provided evidence of the cardioprotective properties of levosimendan including preconditioning and anti-apoptotic. In view of these favorable effects, levosimendan has been tested in patients undergoing cardiac surgery for the prevention or treatment of low cardiac output syndrome. However, initial positive results from small studies have not been confirmed in three recent large trials.

AIM

To summarize levosimendan mechanisms of action and clinical use and to review available evidence on its perioperative use in a cardiac surgery setting.

METHODS

We searched two electronic medical databases for randomized controlled trials studying levosimendan in cardiac surgery patients, ranging from January 2000 to August 2017. Metaanalyses, consensus documents and retrospective studies were also reviewed.

RESULTS

In the selected interval of time, 54 studies on the use of levosimendan in heart surgery have been performed. Early small size studies and meta-analyses have suggested that perioperative levosimendan infusion could diminish mortality and other adverse outcomes (i.e. intensive care unit stay and need for inotropic support). Instead, three recent large randomized controlled trials (LEVO-CTS, CHEETAH and LICORN) showed no significant survival benefits from levosimendan. However, in LEVO-CTS trial, prophylactic levosimendan administration significantly reduced the incidence of low cardiac output syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on most recent randomized controlled trials, levosimendan, although effective for the treatment of acute heart failure, can't be recommended as standard therapy for the management of heart surgery patients. Further studies are needed to clarify whether selected subgroups of heart surgery patients may benefit from perioperative levosimendan infusion.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety Between Milrinone or Dobutamine as Initial Inotrope Therapy in Cardiogenic Shock

Inotropes are an integral component of the early stabilization of the patient presenting with cardiogenic shock. Despite years of clinical experience with the 2 most commonly used inotropes, dobutamine and milrinone, there remains limited data comparing outcomes between the two. We conducted a retrospective review to compare the effectiveness and safety of milrinone or dobutamine for the initial management of cardiogenic shock. Adult patients with cardiogenic shock regardless of etiology who received initial inotrope therapy with either milrinone (n = 50) or dobutamine (n = 50) and did not receive mechanical circulatory support were included. The primary end point was the time to resolution of cardiogenic shock. Changes in hemodynamic parameters from baseline and adverse events were also assessed. Resolution of shock was achieved in similar numbers in both the groups (milrinone 76% vs dobutamine 70%, P = .50). The median time to resolution of shock was 24 hours in both groups ( P = .75). There were no differences in hemodynamic changes during inotrope therapy, although dobutamine trended toward a greater increase in cardiac index. Arrhythmias were more common in patients treated with dobutamine than milrinone, respectively (62.9% vs 32.8%, P < .01), whereas hypotension occurred to a similar extent in both groups (milrinone 49.2% vs dobutamine 40.3%, P = .32). The use of concomitant vasoactive medications, dosage required, and duration of therapy did not differ between groups. There was no difference in the overall rate of discontinuation due to adverse event; however, milrinone was more commonly discontinued due to hypotension (13.1% vs 0%, P < .01) and dobutamine was more commonly discontinued due to arrhythmia (0% vs 11.3%, P < .01). Milrinone and dobutamine demonstrated similar effectiveness and safety profiles but with differences in adverse events. The choice of milrinone or dobutamine as initial inotrope therapy for cardiogenic shock may depend more on tolerability of adverse events.

Mechanical Circulatory Support in High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Due to advancing age and increasing comorbidities, the current population has a higher incidence of complex coronary artery disease, often without surgical options for revascularization. In this setting, hemodynamic support devices are an important adjunct in the interventionist's toolbox as they allow for a safer, more effective procedure. The following paper reviews the indications of various available mechanical support devices, highlights their clinical data and technical parameters, and offers a practical approach towards appropriate patient and device selection.

ECMO and Short-term Support for Cardiogenic Shock in Heart Failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to discuss the role of ECMO in the treatment of cardiogenic shock in heart failure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Trials done previously have shown that IABP does not improve survival in cardiogenic shock compared to medical treatment, and that neither Impella 2.5 nor TandemHeart improves survival compared to IABP. The "IMPRESS in severe shock" trial compared Impella CP with IABP and found no difference in survival. A meta-analysis of cohort studies comparing ECMO with IABP showed 33% improved 30-day survival with ECMO (risk difference 33%; 95% CI 14-52%; p = 0.0008; NNT 3). ECMO is indicated in medically refractory cardiogenic shock. ECMO can be considered in cardiogenic shock patients with estimated mortality of more than 50%. ECMO is probably the MCS of choice in cardiogenic shock with; biventricular failure, respiratory failure, life-threatening arrhythmias and cardiac arrest.

Severe ischaemic cardiogenic shock with cardiac arrest and prolonged asystole: a case report

Background

Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) by veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a valuable treatment option during severe cardiogenic shock and during cardiac arrest unresponsive to conventional management. It is applied to bridge the first critical days until the patient recovers or a destination therapy is established.¹ Prolonged episodes without cardiac electrical activity during VA-ECMO are a major problem, as they may cause pulmonary oedema and severe left ventricular (LV) thrombosis.² Here, we report a case of a 50-year-old man who presented with a 30-h episode of complete absence of electromechanical activity during ECLS and finally recovered with favourable neurological outcome.

Case summary

A 50-year-old man with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest was transferred to a peripheral hospital after initial successful cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). In the emergency room, he presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock with third-degree atrioventricular block. After immediate insertion of a temporary pacemaker, he received percutaneous coronary intervention of the left anterior descending artery and the circumflex artery. Due to worsening cardiogenic shock, ECLS with VA-ECMO and an Impella^® pump was established. Cumulative time of CPR (out of hospital and in hospital) was 41 min. After transfer to our institution’s intensive care unit, both the heart’s mechanical and electrical activity ceased for more than 24 h and recovered slowly thereafter. After showing promising neurological outcome, epicardial pacemaker leads, an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and finally, a LV assist device were implanted. He was dismissed into rehabilitation with only minor neurological residua 6 weeks later.

Discussion

Impella^® implantation on top of VA-ECMO may be considered beneficial in the therapy of prolonged cardiac arrest.³ While VA-ECMO ensures oxygenation and organ perfusion, Impella^® vents the left ventricle and enhances coronary perfusion. In the presented case, a favourable outcome was reached despite an ‘untreated’ prolonged absence of cardiac electromechanical activity. Under specific circumstances during ECLS with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and Impella^®, waiving of temporary pacing may be considered in absent cardiac electromechanical activity to avoid further complications.

Cardiogenic Shock in the Septic Patient: Early Identification and Evidence-Based Management

Sepsis-induced cardiogenic shock is a lethal condition and the management of it is challenging. Cardiogenic shock in the septic patient involves myocardial systolic and diastolic dysfunction. The limited ability of the ventricles to contract effectively results in a decrease in oxygen delivery to the organs and tissues. Supportive therapy is provided to patients with sepsis and no specific drug can reverse the myocardial dysfunction. Rapid diagnosis, prompt antibiotic therapy, cautious protocol-driven fluid resuscitation and vasoactive agents, control of infectious source, and expeditious coronary artery revascularization is recommended to achieve a positive outcome.

[Impact of nursing staff shortage on intensive care medicine capacity in Germany]

BACKGROUND

Compared to other countries, Germany has the highest number of intensive care unit (ICU) beds, but, despite this, a shortage in ICU care is evident. Currently, little comprehensive data on ICU staffing and on subsequent closure of ICU beds are available. The current survey therefore aimed to systematically investigate the closure of ICU beds.

METHOD

A survey was performed among authorized professional trainers in ICU medicine.

RESULTS

Overall, a shortage of ICU beds following bed closure was evident in 76% of all ICU floors with 22% reporting daily ICU bed closure. In 47%, two ICU beds were not available. Emergency care was unrestricted in only 18%, while restrictions were reportedly frequent or even constant in 30%. The main reasons for ICU bed closure were the unavailability of ICU nurses (44%) and the co-existing unavailability of nurses and physicians (19%). On average, the nurse/patient ratio was 1:2.5 in the morning, 1:2.6 in the afternoon, and 1:3.1 in the night shift.

CONCLUSIONS

ICU bed closure regularly occurs in Germany. The underlying main reason has been identified to be the unavailability of ICU nursing staff. This is suggested to directly interfere with emergency care. For this reason, an action plan is urgently needed.

Implantable Ventricular Assist Device Use and Outcomes in People With End-Stage Renal Disease

Background

People with end‐stage renal disease (ESRD) are at risk for advanced heart failure, but little is known about use and outcomes of durable mechanical circulatory support in this setting. We examined use and outcomes of implantable ventricular assist devices (VADs) in a national ESRD cohort.

Methods and Results

We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with ESRD who underwent implantable VAD placement from 2006 to 2014. We examined in‐hospital and 1‐year mortality, all‐cause and cause‐specific hospitalizations, and heart/kidney transplantation outcomes. We investigated as predictors demographic factors, time‐period of VAD implantation, primary or post‐cardiotomy implantation, and duration of ESRD before VAD implantation. We identified 96 people with ESRD who underwent implantable VAD placement. At time of VAD implantation, 74 (77.1%) were receiving hemodialysis, 10 (10.4%) were receiving peritoneal dialysis and 12 (12.5%) had renal transplant. Time from incident ESRD to VAD implantation was median 4.0 (interquartile range 1.1, 8.2) years. Mortality during the implantation hospitalization was 40.6%. Within 1 year of implantation 61.5% of people had died. On multivariable analysis, males had half the mortality risk of females. Lower mortality risk was also seen with VAD implantation in a primary setting, and with more recent year of implantation, but these results did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusions

Medicare beneficiaries with ESRD are undergoing durable VAD implantation, often several years after incident ESRD, although in low numbers. Mortality is high among these patients, highlighting the need for investigations to improve treatment selection and management.

Mechanical circulatory support in patients with cardiogenic shock in intensive care units: A position paper of the "Unité de Soins Intensifs de Cardiologie" group of the French Society of Cardiology, endorsed by the "Groupe Athérome et Cardiologie Interventionnelle" of the French Society of Cardiology

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a major challenge in contemporary cardiology. Despite a better understanding of the pathophysiology of CS, its management has only improved slightly. The prevalence of CS has remained stable over the past decade, but its outcome has seen few improvements, with the 1-month mortality rate still in the range of 40-60%. Inotropes and vasopressors are the first-line therapies for CS, but they are associated with significant hazards, and have well-known deleterious effects. Furthermore, a significant number of patients develop refractory CS with haemodynamic instability, causing critical organ hypoperfusion and/or pulmonary congestion, despite increasing doses of catecholamines. A major change has resulted from the recent advent and availability of potent mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices. These devices, which ensure sustained blood flow, provide a great and long-awaited opportunity to improve the prognosis of CS. Several efficient MCS devices are now available, including left ventricle-to-aorta circulatory support devices and full pulmonary and circulatory support with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. However, evidence to support their indications, the timing of implantation and the selection of patients and devices is scarce. Because these devices are gaining momentum and are becoming readily available, the "Unité de Soins Intensifs de Cardiologie" group of the French Society of Cardiology aims to propose practical algorithms for the use of these devices, to help intensive care unit and cardiac care unit physicians in this complex area, where evidence is limited.

Acute heart failure following myocardial infarction: complement activation correlates with the severity of heart failure in patients developing cardiogenic shock

AIMS

Heart failure (HF) is an impending complication to myocardial infarction. We hypothesized that the degree of complement activation reflects severity of HF following acute myocardial infarction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The LEAF trial (LEvosimendan in Acute heart Failure following myocardial infarction) evaluating 61 patients developing HF within 48 h after percutaneous coronary intervention-treated ST-elevation myocardial infarction herein underwent a post hoc analysis. Blood samples were drawn from inclusion to Day 5 and at 42 day follow-up, and biomarkers were measured with enzyme immunoassays. Regional myocardial contractility was measured by echocardiography as wall motion score index (WMSI). The cardiogenic shock group (n = 9) was compared with the non-shock group (n = 52). Controls (n = 44) were age-matched and sex-matched healthy individuals. C4bc, C3bc, C3bBbP, and sC5b-9 were elevated in patients at inclusion compared with controls (P < 0.01). The shock group had higher levels compared with the non-shock group for all activation products except C3bBbP (P < 0.05). At Day 42, all products were higher in the shock group (P < 0.05). In the shock group, sC5b-9 correlated significantly with WMSI at baseline (r = 0.68; P = 0.045) and at Day 42 (r = 0.84; P = 0.036). Peak sC5b-9 level correlated strongly with WMSI at Day 42 (r = 0.98; P = 0.005). Circulating endothelial cell activation markers sICAM-1 and sVCAM-1 were higher in the shock group during the acute phase (P < 0.01), and their peak levels correlated with sC5b-9 peak level in the whole HF population (r = 0.32; P = 0.014 and r = 0.30; P = 0.022, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Complement activation discriminated cardiogenic shock from non-shock in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by HF and correlated with regional contractility and endothelial cell activation, suggesting a pathogenic role of complement in this condition.