Cardiogenic Shock Management: International Survey of Contemporary Practices

J Invasive Cardiol. 2020 Oct;32(10):371-374.

Abstract

Background: Limited data exist on current cardiogenic shock (CS) management strategies.

Methods: A 48-item open- and closed-ended question survey on the diagnosis and management of CS.

Results: A total of 211 respondents (3.2%) completed the survey, including 64% interventional cardiologists, 14% general cardiologists, 11% advanced heart failure cardiologists, 5% intensivists, 3% cardiothoracic surgeons; the remainder were internists, emergency medicine, and other physicians. Nearly half (45%) reported practicing at sites without advanced heart failure support/resources, with neither durable ventricular assist devices nor heart transplant available; 16% practice at sites without on-site cardiac surgery and 6% do not offer 24/7 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) coverage. The majority (70%) practice in closed intensive care units with multidisciplinary rounding (73%), cardiologists frequently involved in patient care (89%), and involving cardiology-intensivist co-management (41%). Over half (55%) reported use of CS protocols, 61% reported routine arterial line use, 25% reported routine use of pulmonary artery catheter use to guide management and 9% did not. The preferred vasopressor and/or inotrope was norepinephrine (68%). For coronary angiography and PCI, 53% use transradial access, 72% only revascularize the culprit vessel, and 44% institute mechanical circulatory support (MCS) prior to revascularization. Percutaneous MCS availability was as follows: intra-aortic balloon pump (92%), Impella (78%), peripheral veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (66%), and TandemHeart (28%). Most respondents (58%) do not use a scoring system for risk stratification and most (62%) reported that CS-specific cardiac rehabilitation programs were unavailable at their sites.

Conclusion: Wide variation exists in the care delivered and/or resources available for patients with CS. Our survey suggests opportunities for standardization of care.

Keywords: heart failure; mechanical circulatory support; risk stratification; shock.

MeSH terms

  • Heart-Assist Devices*
  • Humans
  • Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumping
  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention*
  • Shock, Cardiogenic* / diagnosis
  • Shock, Cardiogenic* / therapy
  • Surveys and Questionnaires