Journals / MN Kardiyoloji / 2022 / Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 1

Cardiogenic Shock

Kardiyojenik Şok

Pages
47–55
Publication Date
2022-10-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this review, we summarized the recent definition and classification, pathophysiology and risk scores, treatment and new proposed treatment modalities for cardiogenic shock.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Cardiogenic shock is a syndrome due to low cardiac output leading to hypoperfusion, with possible progression to multi organ failure and death, if not treated promptly.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It has a complex and multifactorial clinic with high rates of mortality.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this review, we summarized the recent definition and classification, pathophysiology and risk scores, treatment and new proposed treatment modalities for cardiogenic shock.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Cardiogenic shock is a syndrome due to low cardiac output leading to hypoperfusion, with possible progression to multi organ failure and death, if not treated promptly. It has a complex and multifactorial clinic with high rates of mortality. After the insult of hypoperfu‐ sion, hemodynamic changes for restoration leads to further distruption and inflammation starts consecutively. This vicious circle can lead to death. Till now, different definitions of cardiogenic shoch had been used in different trials. Recently, Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions defined a new classification for cardiogenic shock, validated at all subtypes. Acute coronary syndrome associated cardiogenic shock is the typical form and constitutes two thirds of cases. Despite the recent progress in medicine and devel‐ opement of new mechanical circulatory support devices, in hospital mortality of cardiogenic shock is around 30‐50%. Because of the prominent negative effects of inotropic agents, especially on metabolic and hemodynamic parameters, mechanical circulatory support has gained support in recent years. More concern has been put on the cellular level at pathophysiology and the disease has been con‐ cieved as a hemometabolic process. So, recently more aggresive and early management patterns has been supported. In this review, we summarized the recent definition and classification, pathophysiology and risk scores, treatment and new proposed treatment modalities for cardiogenic shock.

Özet

Kardiyojenik şok, düşük kardiyak debiye sekonder hipoperfüzyon ve sonrasında çoklu organ yetmezliği ve ölüme kadar ilerleyebilen bir kliniktir. Kompleks ve multifaktöryel bir klinik sendrom olup, günümüzde halen ciddi bir mortalite düzeyine sahiptir. Perfüzyonun bozul‐ masını takiben devreye giren hemodinamik değişiklikler ve enflamasyon, çoklu organ yetmezliği ve ölüme kadar götüren bir spiral oluş‐ turmaktadır. Günümüzde yapılmış birçok çalışmada farklı tanımlamalar kullanılmışsa da son yayınlanan Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions sınıflaması evrensel bir sınıflama getirerek tüm kardiyojenik şok çeşitlerinde geçerlilik kazanmıştır. Akut koroner sendrom ilişkili şok; tipik klinik kardiyojenik şok formudur ve vakaların yaklaşık üçte ikisini teşkil eder. Son yıllardaki tedavi yak‐ laşımındaki gelişmeler, ilaç teknolojileri ve mekanik destek cihazlarına rağmen kardiyojenik şokta hastane içi mortalite halen %30‐50 ci‐ varındadır. Son yıllarda vazokonstriktör ajanların olumsuz metabolik ve hemodinamik etkilerinin daha çok gündeme gelmesi, mekanik destek cihazlarının kullanımında artış yaratmıştır. Hücresel düzeydeki bozulmanın öneminin fark edilmesi, hemometabolik bir süreç ola‐ rak bakış açısı getirmiş, daha erken ve agresif müdahale eğilimini doğmuştur. Bu derlemede son gelişmeler ışığında kardiyojenik şokta yeni tanım ve sınıflandırma, patofizyoloji ve risk skorlamaları, son klinik çalışmalar eşliğinde güncel tedavi yöntemleri özetlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZYÜNCÜ, N. (2022). Cardiogenic Shock. MN Kardiyoloji, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 1, 47–55. https://ajindex.com/articles/581440

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Cecconi M. De Backer D. Antonelli M. et al. Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care. Med Intensive Care Med. 2014;40(12):1795815
  2. Tewelde SZ. Liu SS. Winters ME. Cardiogenic shock. Cardiol Clin. 2018;36(1):5361
  3. Chioncel O. Parissis J. Mebazaa A. et al. Epidemiology, pathophysiology and contemporary management of car diogenic shock a position statement from the Heart Failu re Association of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart Fail. 2020;22(8):131541
  4. Ponikowski P. Voors AA. Anker SD. et al. 2016 ESC guide lines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: The Task Force for the diagnosis and treat ment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2016;137(27): 2129200
  5. Thiele H. Zeymer U. Neumann FJ. et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(14):128796
  6. Hochman JS. Sleeper LA. Webb JG. et al. Early revascular ization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by car diogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should We Emer gently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(9):62534
  7. Furer A. Wessler J. Burkhoff D. Hemodynamics of cardio genic shock. Interv Cardiol Clin. 2017;6(3):35971
  8. Baran DA. Grines CL. Bailey S. et al. SCAI Clinical expert consensus statement on the classification of cardiogenic shock: this document was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Associa tion (AHA), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) in April 2019. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;94(1):2937
  9. Diepen S. Katz JN. Albert NM. et al. Contemporary Mana gement of Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2017;136 (16):e232e268
  10. Chioncel O. Mebazaa A. Harjola VP. et al. ESC Heart Failure LongTerm Registry Investigators. Clinical phenotypes and outcome of patients hospitalized for acute heart failure: the ESC Heart Failure LongTerm Registry. Eur J Heart Fail. 2017;19(10):124254
  11. Shah M. Patnaik S. Patel B. et al. Trends in mechanical cir culatory support use and hospital mortality among pa tients with acute myocardial infarction and noninfarction related cardiogenic shock in the United States. Clin Res Cardiol. 2018;107(4):287303
  12. De Luca L. Olivari Z. Farina A. e