CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

左主干支架

科研文章

荐读文献

Clinical Outcome After DK Crush Versus Culotte Stenting of Distal Left Main Bifurcation Lesions: The 3-Year Follow-Up Results of the DKCRUSH-III Study Second vs. First generation drug eluting stents in multiple vessel disease and left main stenosis: Two-year follow-up of the observational, prospective, controlled, and multicenter ERACI IV registry Long-term results after PCI of unprotected distal left main coronary artery stenosis: the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen (BBK)-Left Main Registry Ten-Year All-Cause Death According to Completeness of Revascularization in Patients With Three-Vessel Disease or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the SYNTAX Extended Survival Study Impact of Staging Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Left Main Artery Disease: Insights From the EXCEL Trial Why NOBLE and EXCEL Are Consistent With Each Other and With Previous Trials Complex PCI procedures: challenges for the interventional cardiologist Comparison of Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Native Coronary Arteries Versus on Saphenous Venous Aorta Coronary Conduits in Patients With Low Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Impella Device Implantation Achieved or Attempted (from the PROTECT II Randomized Trial and the cVAD Registry) Stroke Rates Following Surgical Versus Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Expansion or contraction of stenting in coronary artery disease?

ConsensusOctober 10, 2017, Volume 136, Issue 15

JOURNAL:Circulation. Article Link

Contemporary Management of Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

AHA Scientific Statements Keywords: AHA Scientific Statements; delivery of health care; disease management; shock, cardiogenic

ABSTRACT

Cardiogenic shock is a high-acuity, potentially complex, and hemodynamically diverse state of end-organ hypoperfusion that is frequently associated with multisystem organ failure. Despite improving survival in recent years, patient morbidity and mortality remain high, and there are few evidence-based therapeutic interventions known to clearly improve patient outcomes. This scientific statement on cardiogenic shock summarizes the epidemiology, pathophysiology, causes, and outcomes of cardiogenic shock; reviews contemporary best medical, surgical, mechanical circulatory support, and palliative care practices; advocates for the development of regionalized systems of care; and outlines future research priorities.