Massey Howard Todd, Choi Jae Hwan, Maynes Elizabeth J, Tchantchaleishvili Vakhtang
Division of Cardiac Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2019 Jan;8(1):32-43. doi: 10.21037/acs.2018.11.05.
The majority of clinical pathways and paradigms utilized in the treatment and management of cardiogenic shock with temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) are largely based on individual physician intuition and ad hoc problem-solving. Substantial mortality gains in the acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) population were observed with the reported outcomes of the SHOCK trial in 1999 compared to previous populations with AMI-CS. Nonetheless even in the age of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the infarct related artery, survival rates continue to be only approximately 50%. The conventional focus since the SHOCK trial has centered on revascularization strategies and the subsequent medical management of these patients post-PCI with ever diminishing returns. Perhaps we have hit the "glass ceiling" with current strategies and it is time to explore novel strategies to salvage not only the heart but more importantly the patient and potentially more of both. Going forward, researchers need to focus on developing a systematic approach to problem solving in utilizing MCS for patients with cardiogenic shock. Effective methodologies that are evidence based will help physicians in their decision-making when considering temporary MCS for patients.
在使用临时机械循环支持(MCS)治疗和管理心源性休克时,大多数临床路径和模式很大程度上基于个体医生的直觉和临时的问题解决方法。与先前的急性心肌梗死心源性休克(AMI-CS)患者群体相比,1999年SHOCK试验报告的结果显示该群体的死亡率有显著下降。尽管如此,即使在梗死相关动脉进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的时代,生存率仍然仅约为50%。自SHOCK试验以来,传统的重点一直放在血运重建策略以及这些患者PCI术后的后续药物管理上,但其收益不断减少。也许我们目前的策略已经达到了“瓶颈”,是时候探索新的策略来挽救心脏,更重要的是挽救患者,并且有可能挽救更多的心脏和患者。展望未来,研究人员需要专注于开发一种系统的方法,用于在使用MCS治疗心源性休克患者时解决问题。基于证据的有效方法将有助于医生在考虑为患者使用临时MCS时进行决策。