Cargando…

Mechanical circulatory support in acute cardiogenic shock

Cardiogenic shock complicates about 5% to 8% of all admissions for acute myocardial infarction, and despite advancement in treatment over the past 50 years, mortality remains unacceptably high. Management with vasoactive agents after revascularization can have its limitations and thus mechanical cir...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Khan, Mubashar H, Corbett, Brian J, Hollenberg, Steven M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Faculty of 1000 Ltd 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4191250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25374669
http://dx.doi.org/10.12703/P6-91
_version_ 1782338621033938944
author Khan, Mubashar H
Corbett, Brian J
Hollenberg, Steven M
author_facet Khan, Mubashar H
Corbett, Brian J
Hollenberg, Steven M
author_sort Khan, Mubashar H
collection PubMed
description Cardiogenic shock complicates about 5% to 8% of all admissions for acute myocardial infarction, and despite advancement in treatment over the past 50 years, mortality remains unacceptably high. Management with vasoactive agents after revascularization can have its limitations and thus mechanical circulatory support is often initiated. Intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABPs) are the devices most commonly used worldwide. IABPs appeared to improve mortality when used along with fibrinolytic therapy but may not when used along with percutaneous coronary interventions. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is utilized in the setting of worsening tissue perfusion despite inotropes and IABP utilization. Although retrospective studies show some mortality benefit, randomized prospective studies have not yet demonstrated ECMO to be advantageous either with or without IABP. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices such as TandemHeart® and Impella are easier to institute than ECMO and are better for hemodynamics compared with the IABP but also have not yet shown a mortality benefit. More randomized studies are needed to define the most appropriate role of the various mechanical support devices in cardiogenic shock.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4191250
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Faculty of 1000 Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41912502014-11-05 Mechanical circulatory support in acute cardiogenic shock Khan, Mubashar H Corbett, Brian J Hollenberg, Steven M F1000Prime Rep Review Article Cardiogenic shock complicates about 5% to 8% of all admissions for acute myocardial infarction, and despite advancement in treatment over the past 50 years, mortality remains unacceptably high. Management with vasoactive agents after revascularization can have its limitations and thus mechanical circulatory support is often initiated. Intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABPs) are the devices most commonly used worldwide. IABPs appeared to improve mortality when used along with fibrinolytic therapy but may not when used along with percutaneous coronary interventions. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is utilized in the setting of worsening tissue perfusion despite inotropes and IABP utilization. Although retrospective studies show some mortality benefit, randomized prospective studies have not yet demonstrated ECMO to be advantageous either with or without IABP. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices such as TandemHeart® and Impella are easier to institute than ECMO and are better for hemodynamics compared with the IABP but also have not yet shown a mortality benefit. More randomized studies are needed to define the most appropriate role of the various mechanical support devices in cardiogenic shock. Faculty of 1000 Ltd 2014-10-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4191250/ /pubmed/25374669 http://dx.doi.org/10.12703/P6-91 Text en © 2014 Faculty of 1000 Ltd http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode All F1000Prime Reports articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License, which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Khan, Mubashar H
Corbett, Brian J
Hollenberg, Steven M
Mechanical circulatory support in acute cardiogenic shock
title Mechanical circulatory support in acute cardiogenic shock
title_full Mechanical circulatory support in acute cardiogenic shock
title_fullStr Mechanical circulatory support in acute cardiogenic shock
title_full_unstemmed Mechanical circulatory support in acute cardiogenic shock
title_short Mechanical circulatory support in acute cardiogenic shock
title_sort mechanical circulatory support in acute cardiogenic shock
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4191250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25374669
http://dx.doi.org/10.12703/P6-91
work_keys_str_mv AT khanmubasharh mechanicalcirculatorysupportinacutecardiogenicshock
AT corbettbrianj mechanicalcirculatorysupportinacutecardiogenicshock
AT hollenbergstevenm mechanicalcirculatorysupportinacutecardiogenicshock