Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock: a critical appraisal.
Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2022;
20:443-454. [PMID:
35587216 DOI:
10.1080/14779072.2022.2078702]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) is a life-threatening condition frequently encounter in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD).
AREAS COVERED
Despite prompt revascularization, in particular percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and therapeutic and technological advances, the mortality rate for CS related to AMI remains high. Differently from hemodynamically stable setting, a culprit lesion-only (CLO) revascularization strategy is currently suggested in AMI-CS patients, based on the results of a recent randomized evidence burdened by several limitations and conflicting results from non-randomized studies. Furthermore, mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices have raised as a key therapeutic option in CS, especially in case of an early implantation without delaying revascularization and before irreversible organ damage has occurred. We provide an in-depth review of current evidences on optimal revascularization strategies of multivessel CAD in infarct-related CS, assessing the role of MCS devices, and highlighting the importance of shock teams and medical care system networks to effectively impact on clinical outcomes.
EXPERT OPINION
Emerging observational experience suggested that an early implantation of MCS (prior to PCI), the performance of an extensive revascularization and the implementation of shock teams and networks are key factors for improving clinical outcomes.
Collapse