Cardiogenic shock: role of invasive cardiology.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW Early revascularization significantly improved the outcome of patients with cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Nevertheless, the mortality remains substantial, ranging between 40 and 50% after 30 days. The present review summarizes the current evidence regarding revascularization strategies, vascular access site and concomitant antiplatelet and antithrombotic treatment in infarct-related cardiogenic shock. RECENT FINDINGS On the basis of the SHOCK trial, early revascularization is the most relevant procedure to improve the outcome of patients with infarct-related cardiogenic shock. The majority of these patients present with multivessel coronary disease. The randomized CULPRIT-SHOCK trial showed that in the emergency setting, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) should be confined to the culprit lesion. Regarding vascular access site, no data derived from randomized controlled trials in cardiogenic shock are available. Emergency coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is nowadays rarely performed in cardiogenic shock with rates less than 5% but is still a treatment option if coronary anatomy is not amenable to PCI. Regarding antiplatelet treatment, a randomized trial testing the intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor cangrelor versus an oral P2Y12 inhibitor in infarct-related cardiogenic shock is currently being performed. SUMMARY Early revascularization is the cornerstone of treatment of infarct-related cardiogenic shock and should be confined to the culprit lesion in the emergency setting.

[1]  Marco Valgimigli,et al.  2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. , 2019, European heart journal.

[2]  E. Ohman,et al.  Management of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: an update 2019. , 2019, European heart journal.

[3]  S. Desch.  Revascularization strategies in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. , 2019, Current opinion in critical care.

[4]  C. Hassager,et al.  Temporal trends in incidence and patient characteristics in cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction from 2010 to 2017: a Danish cohort study , 2019, European journal of heart failure.

[5]  F. Eberli,et al.  Twenty-Year Trends in the Incidence and Outcome of Cardiogenic Shock in AMIS Plus Registry , 2019, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[6]  Deepak L. Bhatt,et al.  Cangrelor in cardiogenic shock and after cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A global, multicenter, matched pair analysis with oral P2Y12 inhibition from the IABP-SHOCK II trial. , 2019, Resuscitation.

[7]  Volkmar Falk,et al.  2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. , 2018, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[8]  W. O’Neill,et al.  Cardiac Shock Care Centers: JACC Review Topic of the Week. , 2018, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[9]  B. Gersh,et al.  Delays in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Presenting With Cardiogenic Shock. , 2018, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[10]  H. Thiele,et al.  One‐Year Outcomes after PCI Strategies in Cardiogenic Shock , 2018, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  T. Friede,et al.  Impact of treatment delay on mortality in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients presenting with and without haemodynamic instability: results from the German prospective, multicentre FITT-STEMI trial , 2018, European heart journal.

[12]  Marco Valgimigli,et al.  2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). , 2018, European heart journal.

[13]  H. Wienbergen,et al.  Management and predictors of outcome in unselected patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results from the Bremen STEMI Registry , 2018, Clinical Research in Cardiology.

[14]  H. Thiele,et al.  PCI Strategies in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  G. Schuler,et al.  ADP receptor antagonists in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a post hoc IABP-SHOCK II trial subgroup analysis. , 2016, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[16]  G. Schuler,et al.  Multivessel versus culprit lesion only percutaneous revascularization plus potential staged revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: Design and rationale of CULPRIT-SHOCK trial. , 2016, American heart journal.

[17]  Baris Gencer,et al.  ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation , 2011 .

[18]  Sunil V. Rao,et al.  Impact of access site choice on outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2015, American heart journal.

[19]  J. Brachmann,et al.  Immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention versus culprit lesion intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: results of the ALKK-PCI registry. , 2015, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[20]  E. Ohman,et al.  Management of cardiogenic shock. , 2015, European heart journal.

[21]  M. Jeong,et al.  Culprit or multivessel revascularisation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock , 2015, Heart.

[22]  M. Hadamitzky,et al.  Prasugrel vs clopidogrel in cardiogenic shock patients undergoing primary PCI for acute myocardial infarction , 2014, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[23]  M. Jeong,et al.  Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Nonculprit Vessels in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction* , 2014, Critical care medicine.

[24]  S. Ellis,et al.  Outcomes of culprit versus multivessel PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by shock. , 2013, The Journal of invasive cardiology.

[25]  J. Dery,et al.  Early and late outcomes after primary percutaneous coronary intervention by radial or femoral approach in patients presenting in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. , 2013, American heart journal.

[26]  A. Bayés‐Genís,et al.  Transradial percutaneous coronary intervention in cardiogenic shock: a single-center experience. , 2013, American heart journal.

[27]  J. Garot,et al.  Primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, and cardiogenic shock: the role of primary multivessel revascularization. , 2013, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[28]  G. Schuler,et al.  Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  M. Hochadel,et al.  Use and outcomes of multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (from the EHS-PCI Registry). , 2012, The American journal of cardiology.

[30]  Helmut Baumgartner,et al.  ESC / EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization , 2014 .

[31]  D. Roberts,et al.  The ability to achieve complete revascularization is associated with improved in‐hospital survival in cardiogenic shock due to myocardial infarction: Manitoba cardiogenic shock registry investigators , 2011, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[32]  P. Widimsky,et al.  Routine upfront abciximab versus standard periprocedural therapy in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock: The PRAGUE-7 Study. An open randomized multicentre study , 2011, Acute cardiac care.

[33]  J. Tijssen,et al.  Effect of multivessel coronary disease with or without concurrent chronic total occlusion on one-year mortality in patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock. , 2010, The American journal of cardiology.

[34]  R. Mehta,et al.  Percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass surgery for cardiogenic shock and multivessel coronary artery disease? , 2010, American heart journal.

[35]  M. Pfisterer,et al.  Ten-Year Trends in the Incidence and Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[36]  H. White,et al.  Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. , 2006, JAMA.

[37]  S. Assmann,et al.  Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting After Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: Results From the Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock (SHOCK) Trial , 2005, Circulation.

[38]  Samin K. Sharma,et al.  Correlates of one-year survival inpatients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: angiographic findings from the SHOCK trial. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[39]  H. White,et al.  Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK trial. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[40]  H. White,et al.  Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction--etiologies, management and outcome: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK? , 2000, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[41]  R. Califf,et al.  Lack of progress in cardiogenic shock: lessons from the GUSTO trials. , 2000, European heart journal.

[42]  H. White,et al.  Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[43]  E R Bates,et al.  Contemporary reperfusion therapy for cardiogenic shock: the GUSTO-I trial experience. The GUSTO-I Investigators. Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries. , 1995, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[44]  J. Alpert,et al.  Cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction: Incidence and Mortality from a Community-Wide Perspective, 1975 to 1988 , 1991 .