Glimpse into the future.

Jacob Eifer Moller, Norman Mangner, Federico Pappalardo, Holger Thiele
Author Information
  1. Jacob Eifer Moller: Department of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
  2. Norman Mangner: Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiology, Heart Centre Dresden, Technische Universit��t Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
  3. Federico Pappalardo: Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia and Intensive Care, AO SS Antonio e Biagio e Cesare Arrigo, Alessandria, Italy.
  4. Holger Thiele: Department of Cardiology, Heart Centre Leipzig at University of Leipzig and Leipzig Heart Science, Leipzig, Germany.

Abstract

Randomized studies attempting to prove benefit of mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock have failed to reduce the risk of death. Further, both registry and randomized data suggest increased rates of serious complications associated with these devices. This last review in the supplement discusses current evidence and provides a perspective on how the scientific community could advance cardiogenic shock research focused on mechanical circulatory support.

Keywords

References

  1. Circulation. 2020 Jan 28;141(4):273-284 [PMID: 31735078]
  2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Mar 27;(3):CD007398 [PMID: 25812932]
  3. Am Heart J. 2006 Sep;152(3):469.e1-8 [PMID: 16923414]
  4. Lancet. 2023 Oct 14;402(10410):1338-1346 [PMID: 37643628]
  5. Arch Cardiol Mex. 2005 Jul-Sep;75(3):260-6 [PMID: 16294814]
  6. N Engl J Med. 2012 Oct 4;367(14):1287-96 [PMID: 22920912]
  7. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2023 Mar 27;2(2):100586 [PMID: 39129807]
  8. JAMA Cardiol. 2023 Aug 1;8(8):744-754 [PMID: 37342056]
  9. Am Heart J. 2019 Aug;214:60-68 [PMID: 31176289]
  10. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008 Nov 4;52(19):1584-8 [PMID: 19007597]
  11. Eur Heart J. 2017 Dec 14;38(47):3523-3531 [PMID: 29020341]
  12. Eur Heart J. 2005 Jul;26(13):1276-83 [PMID: 15734771]
  13. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2020 Apr;113(4):237-243 [PMID: 31740272]
  14. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Feb;99(3):658-663 [PMID: 34156755]
  15. Crit Care Med. 2010 Jan;38(1):152-60 [PMID: 19770739]
  16. JAMA. 2020 Feb 25;323(8):734-745 [PMID: 32040163]
  17. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Jan 24;69(3):278-287 [PMID: 27810347]
  18. N Engl J Med. 2023 Oct 5;389(14):1286-1297 [PMID: 37634145]
  19. N Engl J Med. 2023 Jan 26;388(4):299-309 [PMID: 36720132]
  20. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2020 Mar;9(2):183-197 [PMID: 32114774]
  21. Circulation. 2019 Mar 5;139(10):1249-1258 [PMID: 30586755]
  22. Circulation. 2020 Dec;142(22):2095-2106 [PMID: 33032450]
  23. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 May 14;73(18):2355-2357 [PMID: 31072581]
  24. Clin Res Cardiol. 2021 Sep;110(9):1412-1420 [PMID: 33180150]
  25. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2005 Feb;19(1):33-9 [PMID: 15976965]
  26. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2020 Sep;13(9):e006692 [PMID: 32862695]
  27. JAMA Intern Med. 2022 Sep 1;182(9):926-933 [PMID: 35849410]
  28. Circulation. 2023 Feb 7;147(6):454-464 [PMID: 36335478]
  29. EuroIntervention. 2023 Aug 21;19(6):482-492 [PMID: 37334659]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0shockRandomizedmechanicalcirculatorysupportcardiogenicstudiesattemptingprovebenefitfailedreduceriskdeathregistryrandomizeddatasuggestincreasedratesseriouscomplicationsassociateddeviceslastreviewsupplementdiscussescurrentevidenceprovidesperspectivescientificcommunityadvanceresearchfocusedGlimpsefutureCardiogenicMicro-axialflowpumpPercutaneousventricularassistdeviceclinicaltrials

Similar Articles

Cited By