Cardiogenic shock is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, and clinicians have increasingly used short-term mechanical circulatory support (MCS) over the last 15 years to manage outcomes. In general, the provision of greater hemodynamic support comes with device platforms that are more complex and potentially associated with more adverse events. In this review, we compare and contrast the available percutaneous and surgically placed device types used in cardiogenic shock and discuss the associated clinical and hemodynamic data to support device use.
CITATION STYLE
Telukuntla, K. S., & Estep, J. D. (2020). Acute Mechanical Circulatory Support for Cardiogenic Shock. Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal. Houston Methodist Debakey Heart and Vascular Center. https://doi.org/10.14797/mdcj-16-1-27
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.