Advertisement

Ischaemic cardiogenic shock

  • Arne Diehl
    Affiliations
    Arne Diehl MD FACEM PGCertCU is a Consultant Emergency Physician currently completing his fellowship in Intensive Care at The Alfred Hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Competing interests: none declared
    Search for articles by this author
Published:January 19, 2017DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpaic.2016.12.002

      Abstract

      Recognition of cardiogenic shock in the setting of myocardial ischaemia has important prognostic and therapeutic implications. Mortality remains high in the order of 50%, despite introduction of urgent revascularization. Resuscitative efforts should focus to avoid multi-organ dysfunction with further spiralling instability that commonly is irreversible. To interrupt these processes, timely recognition and restoration of adequate perfusion is mandatory. The therapeutic means to achieve this beyond early revascularization have been widely debated, in particular the extent of pharmacological support and the timing of mechanical support form key components of modern intensive care treatment. Further research on optimal support and patient selection for more advanced therapies is required.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Anaesthesia & Intensive Care Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Reynolds H.R.
        • Hochman J.S.
        Cardiogenic shock: current concepts and improving outcomes.
        Circulation. 2008; 117: 686-697
        • Hochman J.S.
        • Sleeper L.A.
        • Webb J.G.
        • et al.
        Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiogenic shock.
        N Engl J Med. 1999; 341: 625-634
        • Mebazaa A.
        • Tolppanen H.
        • Mueller C.
        • et al.
        Acute heart failure and cardiogenic shock: a multidisciplinary practical guidance.
        Intensive Care Med. 2016; 42: 147-163
        • Thiele H.
        • Ohman E.M.
        • Desch S.
        • Eitel I.
        • de Waha S.
        Management of cardiogenic shock.
        Eur Heart J. 2015; 36: 1223-1230
        • O'Gara P.T.
        • Kushner F.G.
        • Ascheim D.D.
        • et al.
        2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines.
        Circulation. 2013; 127: e362-425
        • Thiele H.
        • Zeymer U.
        • Neumann F.J.
        • et al.
        Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock.
        N Engl J Med. 2012; 367: 1287-1296
        • Rokos I.C.
        • French W.J.
        • Mattu A.
        • et al.
        Appropriate cardiac cath lab activation: optimizing electrocardiogram interpretation and clinical decision-making for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction.
        Am Heart J. 2010; 160 (1003–1008): 995-1003
        • Zeymer U.
        • Werdan K.
        • Schuler G.
        • et al.
        Impact of immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention versus culprit lesion intervention on 1-year outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: results of the randomised IABP-SHOCK II trial.
        Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2016; https://doi.org/10.1177/2048872616668977
        • Roule V.
        • Ardouin P.
        • Blanchart K.
        • et al.
        Prehospital fibrinolysis versus primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
        Crit Care. 2016; 20
        • Tarvasmäki T.
        • Lassus J.
        • Varpula M.
        • et al.
        Current real-life use of vasopressors and inotropes in cardiogenic shock - adrenaline use is associated with excess organ injury and mortality.
        Crit Care Lond Engl. 2016; 20: 208
        • Unverzagt S.
        • Wachsmuth L.
        • Hirsch K.
        • et al.
        Inotropic agents and vasodilator strategies for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock or low cardiac output syndrome.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; (CD009669)https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009669.pub2
        • Stretch R.
        • Sauer C.M.
        • Yuh D.D.
        • Bonde P.
        National trends in the utilization of short-term mechanical circulatory support: incidence, outcomes, and cost analysis.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64: 1407-1415
        • Unverzagt S.
        • Buerke M.
        • de Waha A.
        • et al.
        Intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation (IABP) for myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015; (CD007398)https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007398.pub3
        • Ouweneel D.M.
        • Schotborgh J.V.
        • Limpens J.
        • et al.
        Extracorporeal life support during cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Intensive Care Med. 2016; 42: 1922-1934