CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

Sex differences in discharge destination following acute myocardial infarction Door to Balloon Time: Is There a Point That Is Too Short? Canadian spontaneous coronary artery dissection cohort study: in-hospital and 30-day outcomes SCAI Clinical Expert Consensus Statement on Cardiogenic Shock Linking Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection, Cervical Artery Dissection, and Fibromuscular Dysplasia: Heart, Brain, and Kidneys Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes Sex-Specific Thresholds of High-Sensitivity Troponin in Patients With Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome Radial versus femoral access and bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in invasively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome (MATRIX): final 1-year results of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Review Article2018 Oct 16;72(16):1972-1980.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Cardiac Shock Care Centers: JACC Review Topic of the Week

Rab T, Ratanapo S, Kern KB et al. Keywords: cardiogenic shock; care pathway; shock center

ABSTRACT

Despite advances over the past decade, the incidence of cardiogenic shock secondary to acute myocardial infarction has increased, with an unchanged mortality near 50%. Recent trials have not clarified the best strategies in treatment. While dedicated cardiac shock centers are being established, there are no standardized agreements on the utilization of mechanical circulatory support and the timeliness of percutaneous coronary intervention strategies. In some centers and prospective registries, outcomes after placement of advanced mechanical circulatory support prior to reperfusion therapy with percutaneous coronary intervention have been encouraging with improved survival. Here, we suggest systems of care with a treatment pathway for patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.