UPDATES IN THE MANAGEMENT OF CARDIOGENIC SHOCK AFTER ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56238/levv16n55-039Keywords:
Cardiogenic Shock, Acute Coronary Syndrome, Revascularization, Mechanical Circulatory Support, Artificial IntelligenceAbstract
Cardiogenic shock (CS) represents the most severe form of acute heart failure and remains one of the leading causes of in-hospital mortality among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This study aimed to identify the main scientific and technological updates in the management of post-ACS CS published between 2015 and 2025. An integrative literature review was conducted using the PubMed, SciELO, ScienceDirect, LILACS, and Consensus.app databases, employing controlled descriptors and Boolean combinations. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 40 articles were selected. The results were organized into four thematic categories: early revascularization and hemodynamic support strategies; use of mechanical circulatory support; technological innovations and predictive models; and recent clinical guidelines and consensus statements. Evidence indicates that early revascularization and rational use of circulatory support devices, combined with the implementation of multidisciplinary Shock Teams, significantly reduce mortality. However, gaps remain regarding the standardization of protocols, validation of predictive models, and integration of emerging technologies. It is concluded that contemporary management of CS requires an integrated approach involving science, technology, and healthcare organization, guided by robust evidence and interdisciplinary collaboration.
Downloads
References
ABU GHOSH, N. et al. In-hospital development of cardiogenic shock and mortality in acute myocardial infarction. European Heart Journal Acute Cardiovascular Care, v. 12, n. 3, p. 245–256, 2023.
BÖHM, M. et al. Development and validation of the STOP SHOCK score for early prediction of cardiogenic shock in acute coronary syndrome. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, v. 12, p. 112–124, 2025.
BRASIL. Ministério da Saúde. Resolução nº 510, de 7 de abril de 2016. Dispõe sobre as normas aplicáveis a pesquisas em Ciências Humanas e Sociais. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União, 2016.
DE LUCA, G. et al. Contemporary management of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: from early revascularization to mechanical circulatory support. European Heart Journal Acute Cardiovascular Care, v. 4, n. 4, p. 273–281, 2015.
EHRENBERGER, J. et al. Early venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in cardiogenic shock: outcomes and timing insights. Journal of Clinical Medicine, v. 12, n. 15, p. 5058–5070, 2023.
HORIMOTO, Y. et al. Combined use of Impella and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECPELLA) in refractory cardiogenic shock: a case series. Clinical Cardiology, v. 46, n. 2, p. 190–198, 2023.
MENDES, K. D. S.; SILVEIRA, R. C. C. P.; GALVÃO, C. M. Revisão integrativa: método de pesquisa para a incorporação de evidências na saúde e na enfermagem. Texto & Contexto Enfermagem, v. 17, n. 4, p. 758–764, 2008.
SADOWSKI, M.; JANION-SADOWSKA, A. Cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: current concepts and future perspectives. Postepy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej, v. 13, n. 2, p. 101–107, 2017.
SAMSKY, M. D. et al. Culprit-lesion-only versus multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in cardiogenic shock. New England Journal of Medicine, v. 377, n. 25, p. 2419–2432, 2021.
SOUZA, M. T.; SILVA, M. D.; CARVALHO, R. Revisão integrativa: o que é e como fazer. Einstein (São Paulo), v. 8, n. 1, p. 102–106, 2010.
THIELE, H. et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. New England Journal of Medicine, v. 367, n. 14, p. 1287–1296, 2015.
ZEYMER, U. et al. Management of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: a position paper and consensus statement from the European Society of Cardiology. European Heart Journal Acute Cardiovascular Care, v. 9, n. 2, p. 183–192, 2020.
