Optimal course of treatment in acute cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction

References

• Nabel EG, Braunwald E. A tale of coronary artery disease and myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:54–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ, et al. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (IABP-SHOCK II): final 12 month results of a randomised, open-label trial. Lancet. 2013;382:1638–1645.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen HL, Yarzebski J, Lessard D, et al. Ten-year (2001-2011) trends in the incidence rates and short-term outcomes of early versus late onset cardiogenic shock after hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6:e005566.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bangalore S, Gupta N, Guo Y, et al. Outcomes with invasive vs. conservative management of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Am J Med. 2015;128:601–608.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochman JS, Buller CE, Sleeper LA, et al. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction–etiologies, management and outcome: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. Should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:1063–1070.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjöberg F, Singer M. The medical use of oxygen: a time for critical reappraisal. J Intern Med. 2013;274:505–528.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Girardis M, Busani S, Damiani E, et al. Effect of conservative vs. conventional oxygen therapy on mortality among patients in an intensive care unit: the oxygen-ICU randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016;316:1583–1589.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo L, Wang W, Zhao N, et al. Mechanical ventilation strategies for intensive care unit patients without acute lung injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2016;20:226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneck M, Holder K, Gielen S, et al. Lung protective ventilation and hospital survival of cardiac intensive care patients. Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed. 2016;111:508–513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gradwohl-Matis I, Mehta S, Dünser MW. What’s new in sedation strategies. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41:1696–1699.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elke G, Van Zanten AR, Lemieux M, et al. Enteral versus parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Crit Care. 2016;20:117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor BE, McClave SA, Martindale RG, et al. Guidelines for the provision and assessment of nutrition support therapy in the adult critically Ill patient: society of critical care medicine (SCCM) and american society for parenteral and enteral nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.). Crit Care Med. 2016;44:390–438.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heyland D, Muscedere J, Wischmeyer PE, et al. A randomized trial of glutamine and antioxidants in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:1489–1497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehta SR, Yusuf S, Díaz R, et al. Effect of glucose-insulin-potassium infusion on mortality in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the CREATE-ECLA randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005;293:437–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minet C, Potton L, Bonadona A, et al. Venous thromboembolism in the ICU: main characteristics, diagnosis and thromboprophylaxis. Crit Care. 2015;19:287.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beitland S, Sandven I, Kjærvik LK, et al. Thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in intensive care patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41:1209–1219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fries D. Thrombosis prophylaxis in critically ill patients. Wien Med Wochenschr. 2011;161:68–72.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Krag M, Perner A, Wetterslev J, et al. Prevalence and outcome of gastrointestinal bleeding and use of acid suppressants in acutely ill adult intensive care patients. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41:833–845.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krag M, Perner A, Wetterslev J, et al. Trials on stress ulcer prophylaxis: finding the balance between benefit and harm. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41:1367–1368.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimmoun A, Novy E, Auchet T, et al. Hemodynamic consequences of severe lactic acidosis in shock states: from bench to bedside. Crit Care. 2015;19:175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraut JA, Madias NE. Lactic acidosis. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:2309–2319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Velissaris D, Karamouzos V, Ktenopoulos N, et al. The use of sodium bicarbonate in the treatment of acidosis in sepsis: a literature update on a long term debate. Crit Care Res Pract. 2015;605830:2015.
   Google Scholar
• Chen X-F, Ye J-L, Zhu Z-Y. [The use of sodium bicarbonate in stages in treating hypoperfusion induces lactic acidemia in septic shock]. Chinese Crit Care Med. 2013;25:24–27.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper DJ, Walley KR, Wiggs BR, et al. Bicarbonate does not improve hemodynamics in critically ill patients who have lactic acidosis. A prospective, controlled clinical study. Ann Intern Med. 1990;112:492–498.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieu D, Neviere R, Billard V, et al. Effects of bicarbonate therapy on hemodynamics and tissue oxygenation in patients with lactic acidosis: a prospective, controlled clinical study. Crit Care Med. 1991;19:1352–1356.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, et al. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:625–634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harjola VP, Lassus J, Sionis A, et al. Clinical picture and risk prediction of short-term mortality in cardiogenic shock. Eur J Heart Fail. 2015;17:501–509.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prondzinsky R, Lemm H, Swyter M, et al. Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: the prospective, randomized IABP SHOCK Trial for attenuation of multiorgan dysfunction syndrome. Crit Care Med. 2010;38:152–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sleeper LA, Reynolds HR, White HD, et al. A severity scoring system for risk assessment of patients with cardiogenic shock: a report from the SHOCK Trial and Registry. Am Heart J. 2010;160:443–450.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng JM, Helming AM, van Vark LC, et al. A simple risk chart for initial risk assessment of 30-day mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock from ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2016;5:101–107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pöss J, Köster J, Fuernau G, et al. Risk stratification for patients in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:1913–1920.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prondzinsky R, Unverzagt S, Lemm H, et al. Interleukin-6, −7, −8 and −10 predict outcome in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Clin Res Cardiol. 2012;101:375–384.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prondzinsky R, Unverzagt S, Lemm H, et al. Acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: prognostic impact of cytokines: INF-γ, TNF-α, MIP-1β, G-CSF, and MCP-1β. Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed. 2012;107:476–484.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tolppanen H, Rivas-Lasarte M, Lassus J, et al. Combined measurement of soluble ST2 and amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide provides early assessment of severity in cardiogenic shock complicating acute coronary syndrome. Crit Care Med. 2017;45:e666–e673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiele H, Schuler G, Neumann FJ, et al. Intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: design and rationale of the Intraaortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock II (IABP-SHOCK II) trial. Am Heart J. 2012;163:938–945.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S, et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: the Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2018;39:119–177.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: the Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:2129–2200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roffi M, Patrono C, Collet JP, et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: task force for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent st-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2016;37:267–315.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Diepen S, Katz JN, Albert NM, et al. Contemporary management of cardiogenic shock: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2017;136:e232–e268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werdan K, Russ M, Buerke M, et al. Cardiogenic shock due to myocardial infarction: diagnosis, monitoring and treatment: a German-Austrian S3 Guideline. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012;109:343–351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the task force on myocardial revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association For Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J. 2014 ;35:2541–2619
   Google Scholar
• Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, White HD, et al. One-year survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. JAMA. 2001;285:190–192.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, et al. Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2006;295:2511–2515.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urban P, Stauffer JC, Bleed D, et al. A randomized evaluation of early revascularization to treat shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. The (Swiss) multicenter trial of angioplasty for shock-(S)MASH. Eur Heart J. 1999;20:1030–1038.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aissaoui N, Puymirat E, Tabone X, et al. Improved outcome of cardiogenic shock at the acute stage of myocardial infarction: a report from the USIK 1995, USIC 2000, and FAST-MI French nationwide registries. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:2535–2543.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Stone GW, et al. Coronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: a meta-regression analysis of randomized trials. Int J Cardiol. 2008;126:37–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg RJ, Spencer FA, Gore JM, et al. Thirty-year trends (1975 to 2005) in the magnitude of, management of, and hospital death rates associated with cardiogenic shock in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a population-based perspective. Circulation. 2009;119:1211–1219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeger RV, Radovanovic D, Hunziker PR, et al. Ten-year trends in the incidence and treatment of cardiogenic shock. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:618–626.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redfors B, Angerås O, Råmunddal T, et al. 17-year trends in incidence and prognosis of cardiogenic shock in patients with acute myocardial infarction in western Sweden. Int J Cardiol. 2015;185:256–262.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeymer U. Inhospital mortality in patients with infarct-related cardiogenic shock undergoing coronary angiography treated with and without acute revascularization therapy. Düsseldorf: Press text of the German Society of Cardiolology. 2017 Apr.
   Google Scholar
• Babaev A, Frederick PD, Pasta DJ, et al. Trends in management and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. JAMA. 2005;294:448–454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiu FC, Chang SN, Lin JW, et al. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery provides better survival in patients with acute coronary syndrome or ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction experiencing cardiogenic shock after percutaneous coronary intervention: a propensity score analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;138:1326–1330.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rastan AJ, Eckenstein JI, Hentschel B, et al. Emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery for acute coronary syndrome: beating heart versus conventional cardioplegic cardiac arrest strategies. Circulation. 2006;114:I477–I485.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehta RH, Grab JD, O‘Brien SM, et al. Clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery: insights from the society of thoracic surgeons national cardiac database. Circulation. 2008;117:876–885.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Post F, Gori T, Giannitsis E, et al. Criteria of the German Society of Cardiology for the establishment of chest pain units: update 2014. Clin Res Cardiol. 2015;104:918–928.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials. Lancet. 2003;361:13–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeymer U, Werdan K, Schuler G, et al. Editor´s Choice- Impact of immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention versus culprit lesion intervention on 1-year outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: results of the randomised IABP-SHOCK II trial. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2017;6:601–609.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiele H, Desch S, Piek JJ, et al. Multivessel versus culprit lesion only percutaneous revascularization plus potential staged revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: design and rationale of CULPRIT-SHOCK trial. Am Heart J. 2016;172:160–169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb JG, Sanborn TA, Sleeper LA, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK Trial Registry. Am Heart J. 2001;141:964–970.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb JG, Lowe AM, Sanborn TA, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:1380–1386.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaguszewski M, Ghadri JR, Seifert B, et al. Drug-eluting stents vs. bare metal stents in patients with cardiogenic shock: a comparison by propensity score analysis. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2015;16:220–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ledwoch J, Fuernau G, Desch S, et al. Drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. Heart. 2017;103:1177–1184.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marcolino MS, Simsek C, De Boer SP, et al. Short- and long-term major adverse cardiac events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Cardiology. 2012;121:47–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernat I, Abdelaal E, Plourde G, et al. Early and late outcomes after primary percutaneous coronary intervention by radial or femoral approach in patients presenting in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. Am Heart J. 2013;165:338–343.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mamas MA, Anderson SG, Ratib K, et al. Arterial access site utilization in cardiogenic shock in the United Kingdom: is radial access feasible. Am Heart J. 2014;167:900–8.e1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez-Leor O, Fernandez-Nofrerias E, Carrillo X, et al. Transradial percutaneous coronary intervention in cardiogenic shock: a single-center experience. Am Heart J. 2013;165:280–285.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pancholy SB. Palamaner Subash Shantha G, Romagnoli E et al. Impact of access site choice on outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am Heart J. 2015;170:353–361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ, et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1287–1296.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orban M, Limbourg T, Neumann FJ, et al. ADP receptor antagonists in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a post hoc IABP-SHOCK II trial subgroup analysis. EuroIntervention. 2016;12:e1395–e1403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiele H, Ohman EM, Desch S, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:1223–1230.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antoniucci D, Rodriguez A, Hempel A, et al. A randomized trial comparing primary infarct artery stenting with or without abciximab in acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:1879–1885.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan AW, Chew DP, Bhatt DL, et al. Long-term mortality benefit with the combination of stents and abciximab for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2002;89:132–136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giri S, Mitchel J, Azar RR, et al. Results of primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty plus abciximab with or without stenting for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Am J Cardiol. 2002;89:126–131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang R, Sacks J, Thai H, et al. Impact of stents and abciximab on survival from cardiogenic shock treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;65:25–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeymer U, Tebbe U, Weber M, et al. Prospective evaluation of early abciximab and primary percutaneous intervention for patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: results of the REO-SHOCK trial. J Invasive Cardiol. 2003;15:385–389.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tousek P, Rokyta R, Tesarova J, et al. Routine upfront abciximab versus standard periprocedural therapy in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock: the PRAGUE-7 Study. An open randomized multicentre study. Acute Card Care. 2011;13:116–122.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tomassini F, Gagnor A, Migliardi A, et al. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: predictors of long-term survival. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;78:505–511.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim HS, Andrianopoulos N, Sugumar H, et al. Long-term survival of elderly patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Int J Cardiol. 2015;195:259–264.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levy B, Bastien O, Karim B, et al. Experts‘ recommendations for the management of adult patients with cardiogenic shock. Ann Intensive Care. 2015;5:52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attaná P, Lazzeri C, Chiostri M, et al. Lactate clearance in cardiogenic shock following ST elevation myocardial infarction: a pilot study. Acute Card Care. 2012;14:20–26.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Park TK, Yang JH, Choi SH, et al. Clinical outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by severe refractory cardiogenic shock assisted with percutaneous cardiopulmonary support. Yonsei Med J. 2014;55:920–927.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slottosch I, Liakopoulos O, Kuhn E, et al. Lactate and lactate clearance as valuable tool to evaluate ECMO therapy in cardiogenic shock. J Crit Care. 2017;42:35–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotter G, Williams SG, Vered Z, et al. Role of cardiac power in heart failure. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2003;18:215–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotter G, Moshkovitz Y, Kaluski E, et al. The role of cardiac power and systemic vascular resistance in the pathophysiology and diagnosis of patients with acute congestive heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 2003;5:443–451.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fincke R, Hochman JS, Lowe AM, et al. Cardiac power is the strongest hemodynamic correlate of mortality in cardiogenic shock: a report from the SHOCK trial registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:340–348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendoza DD, Cooper HA, Panza JA. Cardiac power output predicts mortality across a broad spectrum of patients with acute cardiac disease. Am Heart J. 2007;153:366–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russ MA, Prondzinsky R, Carter JM, et al. Right ventricular function in myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: improvement with levosimendan. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:3017–3023.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J, et al. Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:779–789.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakr Y, Reinhart K, Vincent JL, et al. Does dopamine administration in shock influence outcome? Results of the sepsis occurrence in acutely Ill patients (SOAP) study. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:589–597.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarvasmäki T, Lassus J, Varpula M, et al. Current real-life use of vasopressors and inotropes in cardiogenic shock - adrenaline use is associated with excess organ injury and mortality. Crit Care. 2016;20:208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mebazaa A, Nieminen MS, Filippatos GS, et al. Levosimendan vs. dobutamine: outcomes for acute heart failure patients on beta-blockers in SURVIVE. Eur J Heart Fail. 2009;11:304–311.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metra M, Nodari S, D‘Aloia A, et al. Beta-blocker therapy influences the hemodynamic response to inotropic agents in patients with heart failure: a randomized comparison of dobutamine and enoximone before and after chronic treatment with metoprolol or carvedilol. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:1248–1258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christoph A, Prondzinsky R, Russ M, et al. Early and sustained haemodynamic improvement with levosimendan compared to intraaortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP) in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Acute Card Care. 2008;10:49–57.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Delle KG, Buberl A, Geppert A, et al. Hemodynamic effects of a continuous infusion of levosimendan in critically ill patients with cardiogenic shock requiring catecholamines. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2003;47:1251–1256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rokyta R, Pechman V. The effects of Levosimendan on global haemodynamics in patients with cardiogenic shock. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2006;27:121–127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Husebye T, Eritsland J, Müller C, et al. Levosimendan in acute heart failure following primary percutaneous coronary intervention-treated acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Results from the LEAF trial: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. Eur J Heart Fail. 2013;15:565–572.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dominguez-Rodriguez A, Samimi-Fard S, Garcia-Gonzalez MJ, et al. Effects of levosimendan versus dobutamine on left ventricular diastolic function in patients with cardiogenic shock after primary angioplasty. Int J Cardiol. 2008;128:214–217.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García-González MJ, Domínguez-Rodríguez A, Ferrer-Hita JJ, et al. Cardiogenic shock after primary percutaneous coronary intervention: effects of levosimendan compared with dobutamine on haemodynamics. Eur J Heart Fail. 2006;8:723–728.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samimi-Fard S, García-González MJ, Domínguez-Rodríguez A, et al. Effects of levosimendan versus dobutamine on long-term survival of patients with cardiogenic shock after primary coronary angioplasty. Int J Cardiol. 2008;127:284–287.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert EM, Hershberger RE, Wiechmann RJ, et al. Pharmacologic and hemodynamic effects of combined beta-agonist stimulation and phosphodiesterase inhibition in the failing human heart. Chest. 1995;108:1524–1532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aranda JM, Schofield RS, Pauly DF, et al. Comparison of dobutamine versus milrinone therapy in hospitalized patients awaiting cardiac transplantation: a prospective, randomized trial. Am Heart J. 2003;145:324–329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Felker GM, Benza RL, Chandler AB, et al. Heart failure etiology and response to milrinone in decompensated heart failure: results from the OPTIME-CHF study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:997–1003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cuffe MS, Califf RM, Adams KF, et al. Short-term intravenous milrinone for acute exacerbation of chronic heart failure: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002;287:1541–1547.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koreny M, Geppert A, Wutte M, et al. Effects of milrinone on pulmonary gas exchange in catecholamine-dependent heart failure. Am J Cardiol. 2000;86:570–3, A10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuhrmann JT, Schmeisser A, Schulze MR, et al. Levosimendan is superior to enoximone in refractory cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Crit Care Med. 2008;36:2257–2266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumenstein J, de Waha S, Thiele H. Percutaneous ventricular assist devices and extracorporeal life support: current applications. EuroIntervention. 2016;12(Suppl X):X61–X67.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Combes A, Brodie D, Chen YS, et al. The ICM research agenda on extracorporeal life support. Intensive Care Med. 2017;43:1306–1318.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandhu A, McCoy LA, Negi SI, et al. Use of mechanical circulatory support in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Circulation. 2015;132:1243–1251.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Werdan K, Gielen S, Ebelt H, et al. Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:156–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiele H, Jobs A, Ouweneel DM, et al. Percutaneous short-term active mechanical support devices in cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials. Eur Heart J. 2017;38:3523–3531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prondzinsky R, Werdan K. Extracorporeal life support during cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock-how good is the evidence really. Ann Transl Med. 2017;5:58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• den Uil CA, Akin S, Jewbali LS, et al. Short-term mechanical circulatory support as a bridge to durable left ventricular assist device implantation in refractory cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;52:14–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Authors/Task FM, Document R. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: the Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur J Heart Fail. 2016;18:891–975.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karagiannidis C, Brodie D, Strassmann S, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: evolving epidemiology and mortality. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42:889–896.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjauw KD, Engström AE, Vis MM, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of intra-aortic balloon pump therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: should we change the guidelines. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:459–468.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unverzagt S, Buerke M, de Waha A, et al. Intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation (IABP) for myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;CD007398:1–70.
   Google Scholar
• Burkhoff D, Cohen H, Brunckhorst C, et al. A randomized multicenter clinical study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TandemHeart percutaneous ventricular assist device versus conventional therapy with intraaortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock. Am Heart J. 2006;152:469.e1–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiele H, Sick P, Boudriot E, et al. Randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon support with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients with revascularized acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:1276–1283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seyfarth M, Sibbing D, Bauer I, et al. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device versus intra-aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:1584–1588.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouweneel DM, Eriksen E, Sjauw KD, et al. Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support versus intra-aortic balloon pump in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:278–287.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeymer U, Thiele H. Mechanical support for cardiogenic shock: lost in translation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:288–290.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beurtheret S, Mordant P, Paoletti X, et al. Emergency circulatory support in refractory cardiogenic shock patients in remote institutions: a pilot study (the cardiac-RESCUE program). Eur Heart J. 2013;34:112–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheu JJ, Tsai TH, Lee FY, et al. Early extracorporeal membrane oxygenator-assisted primary percutaneous coronary intervention improved 30-day clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction complicated with profound cardiogenic shock. Crit Care Med. 2010;38:1810–1817.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng R, Hachamovitch R, Kittleson M, et al. Complications of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for treatment of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest: a meta-analysis of 1,866 adult patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014;97:610–616.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aissaoui N, Caudron J, Leprince P, et al. Right-left ventricular interdependence: a promising predictor of successful extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) weaning after assistance for refractory cardiogenic shock. Intensive Care Med. 2017;43:592–594.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith M, Vukomanovic A, Brodie D, et al. Duration of veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (VA ECMO) and outcome: an analysis of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry. Crit Care. 2017;21:45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aso S, Matsui H, Fushimi K, et al. The effect of intraaortic balloon pumping under venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation on mortality of cardiogenic patients: an analysis using a nationwide inpatient database. Crit Care Med. 2016;44:1974–1979.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuding S, Werda K. IABP plus ECMO - Is one and one more than two?. J Thoracic Disease. 2017;9:961–964.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouweneel DM, Schotborgh JV, Limpens J, et al. Extracorporeal life support during cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42:1922–1934.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camboni D, Philipp A, Rottenkolber V, et al. Long-term survival and quality of life after extracorporeal life support: a 10-year report. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;52:241–247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kellner P, Prondzinsky R, Pallmann L, et al. Predictive value of outcome scores in patients suffering from cardiogenic shock complicating AMI: APACHE II, APACHE III, Elebute-Stoner, SOFA, and SAPS II. Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed. 2013;108:666–674.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Na SJ, Park TK, Lee GY, et al. Impact of a cardiac intensivist on mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock. Int J Cardiol. 2017;244:220–225.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goslar T, Knafelj R, Radsel P, et al. Emergency percutaneous implantation of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the catheterisation laboratory. EuroIntervention. 2016;12:1465–1472.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kagawa E, Dote K, Kato M, et al. Should we emergently revascularize occluded coronaries for cardiac arrest?: rapid-response extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and intra-arrest percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 2012;126:1605–1613.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nagao K, Kikushima K, Watanabe K, et al. Early induction of hypothermia during cardiac arrest improves neurological outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who undergo emergency cardiopulmonary bypass and percutaneous coronary intervention. Circ J. 2010;74:77–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mukku VK, Cai Q, Gilani S, et al. Use of impella ventricular assist device in patients with severe coronary artery disease presenting with cardiac arrest. Int J Angiol. 2012;21:163–166.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brooks SC, Anderson ML, Bruder E, et al. Part 6: alternative techniques and ancillary devices for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: 2015 American Heart Association guidelines update for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation. 2015;132:S436–S443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soar J, Nolan JP, Böttiger BW, et al. European resuscitation council guidelines for resuscitation 2015: section 3. adult advanced life support. Resuscitation. 2015;95:100–147.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Chambrun MP, Bréchot N, Lebreton G, et al. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory cardiogenic shock post-cardiac arrest. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42:1999–2007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorjup V, Noc M, Radsel P. Invasive strategy in patients with resuscitated cardiac arrest and ST elevation myocardial infarction. World J Cardiol. 2014;6:444–448.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Noc M, Fajadet J, Lassen JF, et al. Invasive coronary treatment strategies for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a consensus statement from the European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)/stent for life (SFL) groups. EuroIntervention. 2014;10:31–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erlinge D, Götberg M, Noc M, et al. Therapeutic hypothermia for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction-combined analysis of the RAPID MI-ICE and the CHILL-MI trials. Ther Hypothermia Temp Manag. 2015;5:77–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noc M, Erlinge D, Neskovic AN, et al. COOL AMI EU pilot trial: a multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled trial to assess cooling as an adjunctive therapy to percutaneous intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction. EuroIntervention. 2017;13:e531–e539.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nichol G, Strickland W, Shavelle D, et al. Prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled pilot trial of peritoneal hypothermia in patients with ST-segment- elevation myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:e001965.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villablanca PA, Rao G, Briceno DF, et al. Therapeutic hypothermia in ST elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials. Heart. 2016;102:712–719.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fuernau G. Milde Hypothermie im infarktbedingten kardiogenen Schock – die randomisierte SHOCK-COOL Pilotstudie. Düsseldorf: press text of the German Society of Cardiolology. 2016 Apr.
   Google Scholar
• Skulec R, Kovarnik T, Dostalova G, et al. Induction of mild hypothermia in cardiac arrest survivors presenting with cardiogenic shock syndrome. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2008;52:188–194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zobel C, Adler C, Kranz A, et al. Mild therapeutic hypothermia in cardiogenic shock syndrome. Crit Care Med. 2012;40:1715–1723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nolan JP, Soar J, Cariou A, et al. European resuscitation council and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine guidelines for post-resuscitation care 2015: section 5 of the european resuscitation council guidelines for resuscitation 2015. Resuscitation. 2015;95:202–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benza RL, Tallaj JA, Felker GM, et al. The impact of arrhythmias in acute heart failure. J Card Fail. 2004;10:279–284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirchhof P, Benussi S, Kotecha D, et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:2893–2962.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priori SG, Blomström-Lundqvist C, Mazzanti A, et al. 2015 ESC guidelines for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death: the task force for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)endorsed by: Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). Eur Heart J. 2015;36:2793–2867.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goyal A, Spertus JA, Gosch K, et al. Serum potassium levels and mortality in acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2012;307:157–164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eitel C, Gaspar T, Bode K, et al. Temporary left ventricular stimulation in patients with refractory cardiogenic shock and asynchronous left ventricular contraction: a safety and feasibility study. Heart Rhythm. 2013;10:46–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavazzi G, Kontogeorgis A, Bergsland NP, et al. Resolution of cardiogenic shock using echocardiography-guided pacing optimization in intensive care: a case series. Crit Care Med. 2016;44:e755–e761.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavazzi G, Kontogeorgis A, Guarracino F, et al. Heart rate modification of cardiac output following cardiac surgery: the importance of cardiac time intervals. Crit Care Med. 2017;45:e782–e788.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fengler K, Fuernau G, Desch S, et al. Gender differences in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: a substudy of the IABP-SHOCK II-trial. Clin Res Cardiol. 2015;104:71–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• den Uil CA, Lagrand WK. van der Ent M et al. Conventional hemodynamic resuscitation may fail to optimize tissue perfusion: an observational study on the effects of dobutamine, enoximone, and norepinephrine in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. PLoS One. 2014;9:e103978.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar