Beyond one-size-fits-all in cardiogenic shock: impella, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or tailored use of mechanical circulatory support?
Identifikátory výsledku
Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00064165%3A_____%2F24%3A10483177" target="_blank" >RIV/00064165:_____/24:10483177 - isvavai.cz</a>
Nalezeny alternativní kódy
RIV/00216208:11110/24:10483177
Výsledek na webu
<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=glrCR0uDMX" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=glrCR0uDMX</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001165" target="_blank" >10.1097/MCC.0000000000001165</a>
Alternativní jazyky
Jazyk výsledku
angličtina
Název v původním jazyce
Beyond one-size-fits-all in cardiogenic shock: impella, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or tailored use of mechanical circulatory support?
Popis výsledku v původním jazyce
Purpose of review: This article offers an overview of recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing the efficacy of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) and microaxial flow pump (mAFP) in treating cardiogenic shock, including findings from the DanGer shock trial. It summarizes the clinical implications and limitations of these studies and key decision-making considerations for cardiogenic shock device use. Recent findings: Despite important limitations in all published RCTs, the routine use of VA ECMO for acute myocardial infarction related cardiogenic shock did not demonstrate benefit and should be reserved for selected patients with extreme forms of cardiogenic shock. Conversely, mAFP (Impella CP) appears promising for cardiogenic shock due to ST elevation myocardial infarction. A stepwise approach - initial mAFP use for cardiogenic shock with left ventricular failure, supplemented by VA ECMO if mAFP is inadequate or if severe right ventricular failure is present - may be preferable, but requires validation through RCTs. High complication rates in device arms underscore the need for careful patient selection, preventive strategies, education for centers and operators, and further research. Summary: Recent trials offer insights into mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock, but their real-world applicability is limited. Despite potential benefits, the use of VA ECMO and mAFP is associated with significant complication rates, emphasizing the need for personalized use.
Název v anglickém jazyce
Beyond one-size-fits-all in cardiogenic shock: impella, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or tailored use of mechanical circulatory support?
Popis výsledku anglicky
Purpose of review: This article offers an overview of recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing the efficacy of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) and microaxial flow pump (mAFP) in treating cardiogenic shock, including findings from the DanGer shock trial. It summarizes the clinical implications and limitations of these studies and key decision-making considerations for cardiogenic shock device use. Recent findings: Despite important limitations in all published RCTs, the routine use of VA ECMO for acute myocardial infarction related cardiogenic shock did not demonstrate benefit and should be reserved for selected patients with extreme forms of cardiogenic shock. Conversely, mAFP (Impella CP) appears promising for cardiogenic shock due to ST elevation myocardial infarction. A stepwise approach - initial mAFP use for cardiogenic shock with left ventricular failure, supplemented by VA ECMO if mAFP is inadequate or if severe right ventricular failure is present - may be preferable, but requires validation through RCTs. High complication rates in device arms underscore the need for careful patient selection, preventive strategies, education for centers and operators, and further research. Summary: Recent trials offer insights into mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock, but their real-world applicability is limited. Despite potential benefits, the use of VA ECMO and mAFP is associated with significant complication rates, emphasizing the need for personalized use.
Klasifikace
Druh
J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science
CEP obor
—
OECD FORD obor
30221 - Critical care medicine and Emergency medicine
Návaznosti výsledku
Projekt
—
Návaznosti
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Ostatní
Rok uplatnění
2024
Kód důvěrnosti údajů
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku
Název periodika
Current Opinion in Critical Care
ISSN
1070-5295
e-ISSN
1531-7072
Svazek periodika
30
Číslo periodika v rámci svazku
4
Stát vydavatele periodika
US - Spojené státy americké
Počet stran výsledku
8
Strana od-do
371-378
Kód UT WoS článku
001262286400001
EID výsledku v databázi Scopus
2-s2.0-85197492138