Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Mar 23:16:e06.
doi: 10.15420/usc.2021.14. eCollection 2022.

Advocacy and Legislation for Regionalization Practices in the Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock: The Time Is Now

Kari Gorder  1 , Steve Rudick  1 , Timothy D Smith  1
Affiliations
Review

Advocacy and Legislation for Regionalization Practices in the Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock: The Time Is Now

Kari Gorder et al. US Cardiol. .

Abstract

Cardiogenic shock is a complex hemodynamic state that, despite improvements in care, often remains challenging to treat and confers a high mortality rate. Timely application of advanced strategies, including advanced hemodynamic management and mechanical circulatory support, is of the utmost importance for this critically ill patient population. Based on data and historic experiences with similar life-threatening conditions, a national system in the US of regionalized, structured care for patients with cardiogenic shock has the potential to improve outcomes and save lives. To enact this, national and state leaders, as well as federal regulatory bodies, physician thought leaders, industry representatives, and national organizations, must collaborate and advocate for a clear, structured cardiac shock center network with a tiered model for delivery of care for the sickest population of cardiac patients.

Keywords: Cardiogenic shock; advocacy; ischemic cardiomyopathy; legislation; shock center network.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Central Illustration:
Central Illustration:. Advocacy and Legislation for Cardiogenic Shock
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kolte D, Khera S, Aronow WS et al. Trends in incidence, management, and outcomes of cardiogenic shock complicating ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the united states. J Am Heart Assoc. 2014;3:e000590. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.113.000590. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shah RU, Henry TD, Rutten-Ramos S et al. Increasing percutaneous coronary interventions for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in the United States: progress and opportunity. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:139–46. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.07.017. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Goldberg RJ, Makam RC, Yarzebski J et al. Decade-long trends (2001–11) in the incidence and hospital death rates associated with the in-hospital development of cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2016;9:117–25. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.115.002359. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Miller L. Cardiogenic shock in acute myocardial infarction: the era of mechanical support. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:1881–4. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.12.074. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG et al. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:625–34. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199908263410901. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources