Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Peer-reviewed

SCAI clinical expert consensus statement on the classification of cardiogenic shock

David A. Baran, Cindy L. Grines, Steven R. Bailey, Daniel Burkhoff, Shelley Hall, Timothy D. Henry, Steven M. Hollenberg, Navin K. Kapur, William W. O’Neill, Joseph P. Ornato, Kelly Stelling, Hölger Thiele, Sean van Diepen, Srihari S. Naidu

Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2019

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

BACKGROUND: The outcome of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction has not appreciably changed in the last 30 years despite the development of various percutaneous mechanical circulatory support options. It is clear that there are varying degrees of cardiogenic shock but there is no robust classification scheme to categorize this disease state. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group of experts convened by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions was assembled to derive a proposed classification schema for cardiogenic shock. Representatives from cardiology (interventional, advanced heart failure, noninvasive), emergency medicine, critical care, and cardiac nursing all collaborated to develop the proposed schema. RESULTS: A system describing stages of cardiogenic

Source type
Peer-reviewed study
DOI
10.1002/ccd.28329
Catalogue ID
SNmoj44ac7-pyl893
Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.