ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2019
Update in the Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients with Cardiogenic Shock.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07090382 (Prospective Validation of the STOPSHOCK Score - Artificial Intelligence Based Predictive Scoring System to Identify the Risk of Developing Cardiogenic Shock), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Prospective Validation of the STOPSHOCK Score - Artificial Intelligence Based Predictive Scoring System to Identify the Risk of Developing Cardiogenic Shock (CS) in Patients Suffering From Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS)
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concurrent intra-aortic balloon pump and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute coronary syndrome-related cardiogenic shock: A meta-analysis of multivariate studies.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2025Pooled it
- Machine learning-based scoring system to predict cardiogenic shock in acute coronary syndrome.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Article
- Clinical outcomes and mortality risk of in-hospital cardiac arrest in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of pulmonary artery catheter monitoring for patients with cardiogenic shock of various causes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- A Risk Stratification Scheme for In-Hospital Cardiogenic Shock in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewWe provide a concise update on the contemporary management of cardiogenic shock in the setting of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Early shock recognition, optimal selection and initiation of mechanical circulatory support (MCS), early coronary revascularization, and a team-based, protocol-driven approach are the current pillars of management. RECENT
findingsCardiogenic shock complicates approximately 5-10% of ACS cases and continues to have high mortality. Early use of mechanical circulatory may prevent the downward spiral of shock and has significantly increased over time, supported mainly by registry data. In the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial, culprit-only revascularization was associated with a lower 30-day incidence of all-cause death or severe renal failure, compared with immediate multivessel PCI. Routine revascularization of non-infarct related artery lesion(s) during primary PCI for cardiogenic shock is, therefore, not recommended. The routine use of an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) was not associated with improved outcomes in the IABP-SHOCK II trial. A team-based and protocol-driven approach may further improve outcomes. Recent advances in coronary revascularization and use of MCS, implementation of shock teams and standardized protocols may improve outcomes of cardiogenic shock in ACS patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.