Key result
Systematic review details clinical management strategies for multivessel SCAD complicated by cardiogenic shock.
Why the study?
There is a dearth of literature and no official guidelines available regarding the management of multivessel spontaneous coronary artery dissection, particularly in the setting of cardiogenic shock.
Systematic Review
This systematic review highlights the lack of official guidelines and aims to generate dialogue on the management of multivessel SCAD presenting with cardiogenic shock.
Absence of guidelines and variable strategies for multivessel SCAD shock warrants caution; leaves open need for standardized protocols.
Spontaneous coronary artery dissections (SCAD) are characterized by tears of nonatherosclerotic etiology within coronary vessels. This clinical entity promotes intravascular hematoma formation, which can compress the arterial lumen and obstruct coronary blood flow. Subsequent limitations in coronary perfusion facilitate an environment within the myocardium conducive to acute coronary syndrome and cardiogenic shock from relative hemodynamic perturbation. Although SCAD has been reported in the literature, there is a dearth of literature reporting the management of multivessel SCAD, with no official guidelines available for reference. We present a systematic review of the clinical management of multivessel SCAD within the context of subsequent cardiogenic shock in hopes of generating a dialogue to reach cogent approaches to minimize morbidity and mortality in multivessel SCAD management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kovatsenko et al. (2026) conducted a systematic review in Multivessel Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection With Cardiogenic Shock. Clinical management was evaluated. This systematic review evaluates the clinical management of multivessel spontaneous coronary artery dissection with cardiogenic shock, though no quantitative results are reported in the abstract.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: