Trials, Tribunals, and Opportunities in Cardiogenic Shock Research

The Price We Pay for Progression in Shock Care: Economic Burden, Accessibility, and Adoption of Shock-Teams and Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is associated with high in-hospital and long-term mortality and morbidity that results in significant socio-economic impact. Due to the high costs associated with CS care, it is important to define the short- and long-term burden of this disease state on resources and review strategies to mitigate these.

RECENT FINDINGS

In recent times, the focus on CS continues to be on improving short-term outcomes, but there has been increasing emphasis on the long-term morbidity. In this review we discuss the long-term outcomes of CS and the role of hospital-level and system-level disparities in perpetuating this. We discuss mitigation strategies including developing evidence-based protocols and systems of care, improvement in risk stratification and evaluation of futility of care, all of which address the economic burden of CS. CS continues to remain the pre-eminent challenge in acute cardiovascular care, and a combination of multi-pronged strategies are needed to improve outcomes in this population.

Multidisciplinary Care Teams in Acute Cardiovascular Care: A Review of Composition, Logistics, Outcomes, Training, and Future Directions

As cardiovascular care continues to advance and with an aging population with higher comorbidities, the epidemiology of the cardiac intensive care unit has undergone a paradigm shift. There has been increasing emphasis on the development of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) for providing holistic care to complex critically ill patients, analogous to heart teams for chronic cardiovascular care. Outside of cardiovascular medicine, MDTs in critical care medicine focus on implementation of guideline-directed care, prevention of iatrogenic harm, communication with patients and families, point-of-care decision-making, and the development of care plans. MDTs in acute cardiovascular care include physicians from cardiovascular medicine, critical care medicine, interventional cardiology, cardiac surgery, and advanced heart failure, in addition to nonphysician team members. In this document, we seek to describe the changes in patients in the cardiac intensive care unit, health care delivery, composition, logistics, outcomes, training, and future directions for MDTs involved in acute cardiovascular care. As a part of the comprehensive review, we performed a scoping of concepts of MDTs, acute hospital care, and cardiovascular conditions and procedures.

Inotropic support in cardiogenic shock: who leads the battle, milrinone or dobutamine?

Cardiovascular diseases remain the leading cause of death globally, with acute myocardial infarction being one of the most frequent. One of the complications that can occur after a myocardial infarction is cardiogenic shock. At present, the evidence on the use of inotropic agents for the management of this complication is scarce, and only a few trials have evaluated the efficacy-adverse effects relationship of some agents. Milrinone and Dobutamine are some of the most frequently mentioned drugs that have been studied recently. However, there are still no data that affirm with certainty the supremacy of one over the other. The aim of this review is to synthesize evidence on basic and practical aspects of these agents, allowing us to conclude which might be more useful in current clinical practice, based on the emerging literature.

•

Studies suggest that Milrinone has a higher safety and efficacy profile over Dobutamine.

•

The evidence on the advantages of using Milrinone vs. Dobutamine is heterogeneous.

•

Additional factors need to be considered to reduce the risk of adverse events.