Debate highlights knowledge gaps in managing cardiogenic shock, suggesting future opportunities for improvement.
We have read with great interest the debates between Drs Blumer, Kochar and Sinha vs. Drs Golob and Rao in the recent issue of The Journal of Cardiac Failure-Intersections [1,2]. The two sides meticulously examine the controversies surrounding the role of shock teams in the management of cardiogenic shock (CS). Drs Blumer, Kochar and Sinha advocate for broadscale implementation of high reliability and process-based systems of care for CS, highlighting recent data demonstrating the value proposition of multidisciplinary management as a societally endorsed “best practice” for shock care [1,3].
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tehrani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: