• T Graf and H Thiele.
• Universitäres Herzzentrum Lübeck, Medizinische Klinik II (Kardiologie, Angiologie, Intensivmedizin), Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Deutschland.
• Herz. 2015 Apr 1; 40 (2): 224-30.

AbstractTreatment of patients in cardiogenic shock (CS) presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is still a challenge and mortality rates remain high, approaching 50 %. Hemodynamic stabilization before and/or after early revascularization remains the primary goal in these patients. In addition to hemodynamic support by inotropes and vasopressors, support with mechanical devices such as intra-aortic balloon pumping (IABP), percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) and complete extracorporeal life support (ECLS) with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) may be considered. The use of IABP cannot be recommended anymore on a routine basis. Unfortunately, there are no large randomized data from studies evaluating treatment with mechanical support systems compared to standard treatment with respect to the clinical outcome of patients and no head-to-head comparison of different devices is available. Another important open question to be answered is which subgroups of patients may have a benefit from LVAD therapy. Guidelines discourage the routine use of mechanical support as a first-line treatment in CS patients and emphasize that the application should be restricted to those patients with refractory shock. This article gives an overview of the different devices for percutaneous mechanical support in CS and describes the available evidence and guideline recommendations.

17 keywords...

hide…