Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42095992›Full record

ReviewHeart failure reviews2026

Novel treatment strategies in cardiogenic shock: an update on ongoing clinical trials.

Mireia Padilla-Lopez, Francesca Manicone, Sarah L D Holle, Florian A Wenzl, Antoine Kimmoun, Alexandre Mebazaa, Alessandro Sionis

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Heart failure reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mireia Padilla-Lopez *Cardiology Department, IIB-SantPau, Hospital de la Santa Creu I Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. mpadillal@santpau.cat.
Francesca Manicone *Experimental Laboratory of Intensive Care, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Sarah L D Holle *Department of Cardiology, The Heart Centre, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Florian A Wenzl *Center for Molecular Cardiology, University of Zürich, Schlieren, Switzerland.
Antoine KimmounNancy Teaching Hospital, Intensive care unit, Lorraine University, INSERM U1116, Nancy, France.
Alexandre MebazaaCardiovascular Markers in Stress Conditions, Inserm UMR-S 942 MASCOT, University of Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Alessandro SionisCardiology Department, IIB-SantPau, Hospital de la Santa Creu I Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The identification and management of cardiogenic shock remain significant clinical challenges, as evidenced by persistently high mortality rates and the absence of standardized therapeutic strategies. This article provides a comprehensive overview of ongoing clinical trials in the treatment of cardiogenic shock, organized into three principal approaches aimed at improving patient outcomes: novel pharmacological therapies, optimized use of mechanical circulatory support, and advanced hemodynamic monitoring strategies. By synthesizing the available evidence, we highlight current research directions and discuss how emerging data may inform future clinical practice.

Indexed as

Shock, CardiogenicClinical Trials as TopicHeart-Assist DevicesHemodynamicsHumansIntra-Aortic Balloon PumpingCardiogenic shockClinical trialsHeart failureMechanical circulatory supportMyocardial infarction

Identifiers

PMID42095992

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.