ReviewCirculation. Heart failure2026
A Recovery-Focused Framework for the Management of Cardiogenic Shock.
Review in Circulation. Heart failure, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cardiogenic shock describes a syndrome of systemic hypoperfusion due to insufficient cardiac output. Therapeutic interventions aim to restore systemic perfusion and oxygen delivery, relieve congestion, and reverse the primary culprit pathologies that precipitate shock. Cardiogenic shock care often emphasizes acute rescue and survival; however, survival does not always equal meaningful recovery. In this review, we propose a recovery-focused framework in which myocardial and end-organ recovery are treated as explicit, measurable targets. Building upon prior frameworks proposed for the management of shock, we organize cardiogenic shock management into four overlapping phases: salvage, optimization, stabilization, and de-escalation. Each phase addresses a distinct clinical question: can the patient be rescued, is perfusion and unloading sufficient to prevent further injury, is meaningful myocardial and end-organ recovery occurring, and is recovery durable enough to withdraw support? We synthesize current strategies and highlight emerging targets and research priorities spanning early identification and triage, integrated macro- and microcirculatory monitoring, phenotype-guided management, targeted metabolic and immunologic therapies, use of mechanical circulatory support as a recovery platform, and structured de-escalation of care.
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.