ArticleCHEST critical care2024
The Management of Cardiogenic Shock From Diagnosis to Devices: A Narrative Review.
Article in CHEST critical care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hemodynamic Effects of Anesthetics, Sedatives, and Analgesics in the CICU: Clinical Decision Guidance.JACC. Advances · 2026Review
- Global research trends and hotspots in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiogenic shock: a bibliometric review and knowledge mapping approach (1990-2024).Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- An Integrative Review of the Cardiovascular Disease Spectrum: Integrating Multi-Omics and Artificial Intelligence for Precision Cardiology.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Cardiogenic shock: a review of contemporary approaches and ongoing challenges.Future cardiology · 2025Review
- Advances and controversies in acute decompensated heart failure treatment: beta-blocker roles, emerging devices, and future directions.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Prolonged Impella 5.5 Support in Patients with Cardiogenic Shock: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- What is new in cardiac anesthesia in 2024?Journal of anesthesia and translational medicine · 2025Review
- Modelling and Simulation of the Interactions Between the Cardiovascular System and the Combined Use of VA ECMO and IABP: Comparison Between Peripheral and Central Configurations.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Case report: ST-elevation myocardial infarction complications. How far will you go?Future cardiology · 2025Article
- Sepsis-induced cardiogenic shock: controversies and evidence gaps in diagnosis and management.Journal of intensive care · 2025Review
- Myocardial Recovery in Cardiogenic Shock.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a heterogenous syndrome broadly characterized by inadequate cardiac output leading to tissue hypoperfusion and multisystem organ dysfunction that carries an ongoing high mortality burden. The management of CS has advanced rapidly, especially with the incorporation of temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices. A thorough understanding of how to approach a patient with CS and to select appropriate monitoring and treatment paradigms is essential in modern ICUs. Timely characterization of CS severity and hemodynamics is necessary to optimize outcomes, and this may be performed best by multidisciplinary shock-focused teams. In this article, we provide a review of CS aimed to inform both the cardiology-trained and non-cardiology-trained intensivist provider. We briefly describe the causes, pathophysiologic features, diagnosis, and severity staging of CS, focusing on gathering key information that is necessary for making management decisions. We go on to provide a more detailed review of CS management principles and practical applications, with a focus on tMCS. Medical management focuses on appropriate medication therapy to optimize perfusion-by enhancing contractility and minimizing afterload-and to facilitate decongestion. For more severe CS, or for patients with decompensating hemodynamic status despite medical therapy, initiation of the appropriate tMCS increasingly is common. We discuss the most common devices currently used for patients with CS-phenotyping patients as having left ventricular failure, right ventricular failure, or biventricular failure-and highlight key available data and particular points of consideration that inform tMCS device selection. Finally, we highlight core components of sedation and respiratory failure management for patients with CS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.