ReviewJACC. Advances2022
Optimal Perfusion Targets in Cardiogenic Shock.
Review in JACC. Advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Esophageal resonance Raman spectroscopy tracks mixed venous oxygenation in experimental shock and hypoxemia.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2026Article
- Evolving Evidence-Driven Strategies in Cardiogenic Shock Management.JACC. Advances · 2026Review
- The Role of PoCUS in the Diagnosis and Early Monitoring of Cardiogenic Shock in the Emergency Department: A Narrative Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Comparison of Microcirculation in Chronic Heart Failure, Cardiogenic Shock, LVAD, and Heart Transplantation.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of a Noninvasive Model of Mixed Venous Oxygen Saturation in Heart Failure.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Lactate in cardiogenic shock: pathophysiology, prognostic value, and clinical interpretation.Annals of intensive care · 2026Review
- A retrospective analysis of systolic blood pressure time in target range among patients in coronary care unit.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Cardiogenic shock: a review of contemporary approaches and ongoing challenges.Future cardiology · 2025Review
- Association Between Pressure-Adjusted Heart Rate and In-Hospital Mortality in Cardiogenic Shock.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- Macrovascular Hemodynamics and Peripheral Perfusion in Cardiogenic Shock: Exploring Current Targets and Future Directions.JACC. Advances · 2025Review
- Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support for acute right heart failure: A practical approach.ESC heart failure · 2025Review
- Ramp-Down/Ramp-Up Protocol for Biventricular Dysfunction Management With ECpella Support.JACC. Case reports · 2025Article
- Management of non-Cardiac Organ Failure in cardiogenic shock.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025Article
- Association between mean hemodynamic variables during the first 24 h and outcomes in cardiogenic shock: identification of clinically relevant thresholds.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Higher vasoactive usage despite hemodynamic goals is associated with higher mortality in acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Management of cardiogenic shock: state-of-the-art.Intensive care medicine · 2024Review
- Optimal hemodynamic parameters for risk stratification in acute pulmonary embolism patients.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2024Review
- The Management of Cardiogenic Shock From Diagnosis to Devices: A Narrative Review.CHEST critical care · 2024Article
- Management of cardiogenic shock: a narrative review.Annals of intensive care · 2024Review
- Tissue perfusion pressure enables continuous hemodynamic evaluation and risk prediction in the intensive care unit.Nature medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiology shock is a syndrome of low cardiac output resulting in end-organ dysfunction. Few interventions have demonstrated meaningful clinical benefit, and cardiogenic shock continues to carry significant morbidity with mortality rates that have plateaued at upwards of 40% over the past decade. Clinicians must rely on clinical, biochemical, and hemodynamic parameters to guide resuscitation. Several features, including physical examination, renal function, serum lactate metabolism, venous oxygen saturation, and hemodynamic markers of right ventricular function, may be useful both as prognostic markers and to guide therapy. This article aims to review these targets, their utility in the care of patients with cardiology shock, and their association with outcomes.
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.