CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

急性冠脉综合征

Abstract

Recommended Article

Utility and Challenges of an Early Invasive Strategy in Patients Resuscitated From Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Canadian SCAD Cohort Study: Shedding Light on SCAD From a United Front Late Survival Benefit of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Compared With Medical Therapy in Patients With Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion: A 10-Year Follow-Up Study Global Chronic Total Occlusion Crossing Algorithm: JACC State-of-the-Art Review From Early Pharmacology to Recent Pharmacology Interventions in Acute Coronary Syndromes Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection: Current State of the Science: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Long-Term Follow-Up of Complete Versus Lesion-Only Revascularization in STEMI and Multivessel Disease: The CvLPRIT Trial Treating Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Why, How, and When?

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.