Temporary circulatory support for cardiogenic shock.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Temporary circulatory support (TCS) devices play a crucial role in stabilizing patients with refractory cardiogenic shock. They provide essential hemodynamic support and serve as a bridge to recovery, decision-making, heart transplantation, or long-term mechanical circulatory support. However, despite their increasing use, recent trials challenge their impact on survival. This review summarizes recent findings and discusses challenges in optimizing patient selection and device use.

RECENT FINDINGS

The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) remains the most used TCS device. However, evidence suggests it is ineffective as a standalone therapy. Its value may lie in combination strategies, such as pairing with VA-ECMO, to enhance ventricular unloading. Recent randomized trials on VA-ECMO, including ECLS-SHOCK, have been disappointing. They show no survival benefit in acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock. Even well conducted trials face limitations, including heterogeneous patient populations and challenges in endpoint selection, making definitive conclusions difficult. The Impella device showed promising results in the DanGer Shock trial, with reduced mortality compared to standard care. However, concerns persist about patient selection and the unexpectedly high mortality rate in the control group. Meanwhile, the role of temporary right ventricular assist devices is increasingly recognized, particularly in facilitating hemodynamic stability during left ventricular assist device implantation.

SUMMARY

TCS has revolutionized the management of cardiogenic shock, but significant challenges remain. Further research is needed to refine patient selection, improve device integration, and optimize outcomes. Emerging technologies, including biocompatible materials and artificial intelligence for device monitoring, hold promise for advancing the field. Future studies should also prioritize multicenter collaborations and real-world data to address current limitations in evidence.