Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock: microaxial flow pumps for all and VA-ECMO consigned to the museum? DOI Creative Commons
Daniel De Backer, Dirk W. Donker, Alain Combes

и другие.

Critical Care, Год журнала: 2024, Номер 28(1)

Опубликована: Июнь 20, 2024

Язык: Английский

Microaxial Flow Pump or Standard Care in Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock DOI
Jacob Eifer Møller, Thomas Engstrøm, Lisette Okkels Jensen

и другие.

New England Journal of Medicine, Год журнала: 2024, Номер 390(15), С. 1382 - 1393

Опубликована: Апрель 7, 2024

The effects of temporary mechanical circulatory support with a microaxial flow pump on mortality among patients ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock remains unclear.

Язык: Английский

Процитировано

348

2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI Guideline for the Management of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines DOI

Sunil V. Rao,

Michelle L. O’Donoghue, Marc Ruel

и другие.

Circulation, Год журнала: 2025, Номер unknown

Опубликована: Фев. 27, 2025

Aim: The “2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI Guideline for the Management of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes” incorporates new evidence since “2013 ACCF/AHA ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction” and corresponding “2014 AHA/ACC Non–ST-Elevation “2015 ACC/AHA/SCAI Focused Update on Primary Percutaneous Intervention Infarction.” “2021 Artery Revascularization” retire replace, respectively, “2016 ACC/AHA Duration Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Disease.” Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from July 2023 to April 2024. Clinical studies, systematic reviews meta-analyses, other human participants were identified that published English MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Agency Healthcare Research Quality, selected databases relevant this guideline. Structure: Many recommendations previously guidelines have been updated with evidence, created when supported by data.

Язык: Английский

Процитировано

41

2024 update in heart failure DOI Creative Commons

Alberto Beghini,

Antonio Maria Sammartino, Z. Papp

и другие.

ESC Heart Failure, Год журнала: 2024, Номер unknown

Опубликована: Май 28, 2024

Abstract In the last years, major progress has occurred in heart failure (HF) management. The 2023 ESC focused update of 2021 HF guidelines introduced new key recommendations based on results years science. First, two drugs, sodium–glucose co‐transporter‐2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and finerenone, a novel nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), are recommended for prevention patients with diabetic chronic kidney disease (CKD). Second, SGLT2 now treatment across entire left ventricular ejection fraction spectrum. benefits quadruple therapy reduced (HFrEF) well established. Its rapid early up‐titration along close follow‐up frequent clinical laboratory re‐assessment after an episode acute (the so‐called ‘high‐intensity care’ strategy) was associated better outcomes STRONG‐HF trial. Patients experiencing worsening might require fifth drug, vericiguat. STEP‐HFpEF‐DM STEP‐HFpEF trials, semaglutide 2.4 mg once weekly administered 1 year decreased body weight significantly improved quality life 6 min walk distance obese preserved (HFpEF) or without history diabetes. Further data safety efficacy, including also hard endpoints, needed to support addition acetazolamide hydrochlorothiazide standard diuretic regimen hospitalized due HF. meantime, PUSH‐AHF supported use natriuresis‐guided therapy. options most recent evidence HF, specific drugs cardiomyopathies (i.e., mavacamten hypertrophic cardiomyopathy tafamidis transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis), device therapies, contractility modulation percutaneous valvulopathies, finding from TRILUMINATE Pivotal trial, reviewed this article.

Язык: Английский

Процитировано

38

Temporary mechanical circulatory support in infarct-related cardiogenic shock: an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised trials with 6-month follow-up DOI
Holger Thiele, Jacob Eifer Møller, José P.S. Henriques

и другие.

The Lancet, Год журнала: 2024, Номер 404(10457), С. 1019 - 1028

Опубликована: Сен. 1, 2024

Язык: Английский

Процитировано

33

Management of cardiogenic shock: a narrative review DOI Creative Commons
Driss Laghlam, Sarah Benghanem,

Sofia Ortuno

и другие.

Annals of Intensive Care, Год журнала: 2024, Номер 14(1)

Опубликована: Март 30, 2024

Abstract Cardiogenic shock (CS) is characterized by low cardiac output and sustained tissue hypoperfusion that may result in end-organ dysfunction death. CS associated with high short-term mortality, its management remains challenging despite recent advances therapeutic options. Timely diagnosis multidisciplinary team-based have demonstrated favourable effects on outcomes. We aimed to review evidence-based practices for managing patients ischemic non-ischemic CS, detailing the multi-organ supports needed this critically ill patient population.

Язык: Английский

Процитировано

32

2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI Guideline for the Management of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes DOI
Sunil V. Rao, Michelle L. O’Donoghue, Marc Ruel

и другие.

Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Год журнала: 2025, Номер unknown

Опубликована: Фев. 1, 2025

Язык: Английский

Процитировано

8

Mechanical circulatory support: when, how, and for whom DOI
Jacob Eifer Møller, Hölger Thiele, David A. Morrow

и другие.

European Heart Journal, Год журнала: 2025, Номер unknown

Опубликована: Янв. 10, 2025

Abstract Cardiogenic shock represents a critical condition in which the heart is unable to maintain adequate circulation leading insufficient tissue perfusion and end-organ failure. Temporary mechanical circulatory support offers potential stabilize patients, provide bridge-to-recovery, bridge-to-decision, or facilitate definitive replacement therapies. Although randomized controlled trials have been performed infarct-related cardiogenic refractory cardiac arrest, optimal timing, appropriate patient selection, implementation of these devices remain complex predominantly based on observational data expert consensus, especially non-ischaemic shock. This review explores details ‘when, how, for whom’ temporary should be used, examining specific clinical scenarios, mechanisms by they operate, populations that may benefit. The also highlights many gaps evidence need better understanding interaction between human biology devices.

Язык: Английский

Процитировано

3

Asymptomatic Severe Aortic-Valve Stenosis — To Wait or Not to Wait DOI
Stefan Blankenberg

New England Journal of Medicine, Год журнала: 2025, Номер 392(3), С. 278 - 279

Опубликована: Янв. 15, 2025

Язык: Английский

Процитировано

3

Mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score-matched studies DOI
Christopher Jer Wei Low, Ryan Ruiyang Ling, Michele Petrova Xin Ling Lau

и другие.

Intensive Care Medicine, Год журнала: 2024, Номер 50(2), С. 209 - 221

Опубликована: Янв. 11, 2024

Язык: Английский

Процитировано

17

Scrutinizing the Role of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Has Clinical Practice Outpaced the Evidence? DOI
Enzo Lüsebrink, Leonhard Binzenhöfer, Daniel Hering

и другие.

Circulation, Год журнала: 2024, Номер 149(13), С. 1033 - 1052

Опубликована: Март 25, 2024

The use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for temporary mechanical circulatory support in various clinical scenarios has been increasing consistently, despite the lack sufficient evidence regarding its benefit and safety from adequately powered randomized controlled trials. Although ARREST trial (Advanced Reperfusion Strategies Patients with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation) a secondary analysis PRAGUE OHCA (Prague Arrest) provided some favor VA-ECMO setting out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, INCEPTION (Early Initiation Extracorporeal Life Support not found relevant improvement short-term mortality cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In addition, results recently published ECLS-SHOCK (Extracorporeal Cardiogenic Shock) ECMO-CS Membrane Oxygenation Therapy discourage routine patients infarct-related cardiogenic shock. Ongoing trials (ANCHOR [Assessment ECMO Acute Myocardial Infarction Shock, NCT04184635], REVERSE [Impella CP With VA NCT03431467], UNLOAD [Left Unloading to Improve Outcome Shock on VA-ECMO, NCT05577195], PIONEER [Hemodynamic IABP Elective Complex High-risk PCI, NCT04045873]) may clarify usefulness specific patient subpopulations efficacy combined strategies. Pending further data refine selection management recommendations it remains uncertain whether present usage this device improves outcomes.

Язык: Английский

Процитировано

16