Cardiogenic Shock Management in the Modern Era: A Narrative Review of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a significant clinical challenge with persistently high mortality rates. Defined by impaired cardiac output resulting in end-organ hypoperfusion, CS commonly arises from acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) or acute exacerbations of heart failure (HF-CS). The severity of CS is classified by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) into stages A (at risk) through E (extremis), which informs treatment strategies, including pharmacotherapy and mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Recent advancements in percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices, including intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABPs), Impella devices, TandemHeart, Protek-Duo, and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO), have transformed management paradigms by offering targeted hemodynamic support. While DanGer-SHOCK, a pivotal randomized trial, demonstrated improved outcomes with early Impella use in anterior STEMI-associated CS, the trial's focus population and center expertise suggest that its findings should be interpreted in the context of broader AMI-CS and HF-CS presentations. Device selection is guided by shock severity, anatomical considerations, comorbidities, and institutional capabilities. This review synthesizes current evidence, evaluates the clinical utility and efficacy of existing and emerging percutaneous MCS technologies, and highlights ongoing clinical trials and future directions in optimizing CS management. Emphasis is placed on individualized patient selection, evidence-based deployment of MCS devices, and multidisciplinary team collaboration, which collectively represent a critical transition towards improving clinical outcomes in CS.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease
Published
2025-12-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd13010009
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.67
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cardiogenic Shock Management in the Modern Era: A Narrative Review of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

KaChon Lei, Chowdhury Ahsan, Michael V. DiCaro, Nazanin Houshmand et al.
1 citations
Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
0.67
article

Cardiogenic Shock Management in the Modern Era: A Narrative Review of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

KaChon Lei, Chowdhury Ahsan, Michael V. DiCaro, Nazanin Houshmand, Srijit Jana, Makayla Wijesinghe
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a significant clinical challenge with persistently high mortality rates. Defined by impaired cardiac output resulting in end-organ hypoperfusion, CS commonly arises from acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) or acute exacerbations of heart failure (HF-CS). The severity of CS is classified by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) into stages A (at risk) through E (extremis), which informs treatment strategies, including pharmacotherapy and mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Recent advancements in percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices, including intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABPs), Impella devices, TandemHeart, Protek-Duo, and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO), have transformed management paradigms by offering targeted hemodynamic support. While DanGer-SHOCK, a pivotal randomized trial, demonstrated improved outcomes with early Impella use in anterior STEMI-associated CS, the trial's focus population and center expertise suggest that its findings should be interpreted in the context of broader AMI-CS and HF-CS presentations. Device selection is guided by shock severity, anatomical considerations, comorbidities, and institutional capabilities. This review synthesizes current evidence, evaluates the clinical utility and efficacy of existing and emerging percutaneous MCS technologies, and highlights ongoing clinical trials and future directions in optimizing CS management. Emphasis is placed on individualized patient selection, evidence-based deployment of MCS devices, and multidisciplinary team collaboration, which collectively represent a critical transition towards improving clinical outcomes in CS.

Journal of Cardiovascular Development and DiseaseVol. 13(1)
University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US), University of Nevada, Reno (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
0.67
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.