Key result
Early revascularization remains standard in infarct-related cardiogenic shock, with mixed evidence for mechanical circulatory support.
Why the study?
Cardiogenic shock remains a life-threatening condition with high mortality and morbidity despite advances in revascularization and mechanical support, and clinical studies on its management are complicated with scarce evidence.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Reaffirms early revascularization as standard in MI cardiogenic shock; leaves percutaneous mechanical support role unresolved pending trials.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rahamim et al. (2022) conducted an editorial in Cardiogenic shock. Early revascularization remains the standard of care for cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction, while evidence for percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices remains mixed.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: