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
. 1995 Aug;13(3):391-406.

Cardiogenic shock

Affiliations
  • PMID: 7585775
Review

Cardiogenic shock

M Moscucci et al. Cardiol Clin. 1995 Aug.

Abstract

Despite advancements in the pharmacologic treatment of acute myocardial infarction and the introduction of mechanical hemodynamic support, in-hospital mortality rates for cardiogenic shock have remained between 70% and 80%. In addition, the proven beneficial effects of thrombolytic therapy in reducing mortality in acute myocardial infarction have not been paralleled by similar results in cardiogenic shock. Emergency revascularization appears to be the only intervention that may modify the prognosis of cardiogenic shock. Because the absence of controlled data, however, final conclusions cannot yet be drawn. Two ongoing randomized clinical trials will try to answer the unsolved issues. In the multicenter international SHOCK trial (Should We Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock), patients are being randomized to PTCA or conservative treatment, with mortality as the primary end point. A similar end point will be evaluated in the Swiss Multicenter Study of Angioplasty for Shock following Myocardial Infarction (SMASH) trial. It is hoped that these two randomized trials will be able to prove the value of PTCA in cardiogenic shock and identify the subset of patients most likely to benefit from such treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

MeSH terms

Substances