Ashleigh Long, Amin Yehya, Kelly Stelling, David A Baran
{"title":"冲击的描述和分类:最近的见解","authors":"Ashleigh Long, Amin Yehya, Kelly Stelling, David A Baran","doi":"10.15420/usc.2021.09","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cardiogenic shock continues to present a daunting challenge to clinicians, despite an increasing array of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices. Mortality for cardiogenic shock has not changed meaningfully in more than 20 years. There have been many attempts to generate risk scores or frameworks to evaluate cardiogenic shock and optimize the use of resources and assist with prognostication. These include the Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock (IABP-SHOCK) II risk score, the CardShock score and the new CLIP biomarker score. This article reviews the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) classification of cardiogenic shock and subsequent validation studies. The SCAI classification is simple for clinicians to use as it is based on readily available information and can be adapted depending on the data set that can be accessed. The authors consider the future of the field. Underlying all these efforts is the hope that a better understanding and classification of shock will lead to meaningful improvements in mortality rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":37809,"journal":{"name":"US Cardiology Review","volume":" ","pages":"e15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11664766/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Describing and Classifying Shock: Recent Insights.\",\"authors\":\"Ashleigh Long, Amin Yehya, Kelly Stelling, David A Baran\",\"doi\":\"10.15420/usc.2021.09\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Cardiogenic shock continues to present a daunting challenge to clinicians, despite an increasing array of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices. Mortality for cardiogenic shock has not changed meaningfully in more than 20 years. There have been many attempts to generate risk scores or frameworks to evaluate cardiogenic shock and optimize the use of resources and assist with prognostication. These include the Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock (IABP-SHOCK) II risk score, the CardShock score and the new CLIP biomarker score. This article reviews the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) classification of cardiogenic shock and subsequent validation studies. The SCAI classification is simple for clinicians to use as it is based on readily available information and can be adapted depending on the data set that can be accessed. The authors consider the future of the field. Underlying all these efforts is the hope that a better understanding and classification of shock will lead to meaningful improvements in mortality rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37809,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"US Cardiology Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e15\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11664766/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"US Cardiology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15420/usc.2021.09\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"US Cardiology Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15420/usc.2021.09","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Describing and Classifying Shock: Recent Insights.
Cardiogenic shock continues to present a daunting challenge to clinicians, despite an increasing array of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices. Mortality for cardiogenic shock has not changed meaningfully in more than 20 years. There have been many attempts to generate risk scores or frameworks to evaluate cardiogenic shock and optimize the use of resources and assist with prognostication. These include the Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock (IABP-SHOCK) II risk score, the CardShock score and the new CLIP biomarker score. This article reviews the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) classification of cardiogenic shock and subsequent validation studies. The SCAI classification is simple for clinicians to use as it is based on readily available information and can be adapted depending on the data set that can be accessed. The authors consider the future of the field. Underlying all these efforts is the hope that a better understanding and classification of shock will lead to meaningful improvements in mortality rates.
期刊介绍:
US Cardiology Review (USC) is an international, US-English language, peer-reviewed journal that is published bi-annually and aims to assist time-pressured physicians to stay abreast of key advances and opinion in the area of cardiovascular disease. The journal comprises balanced and comprehensive review articles written by leading authorities. The journal provides updates on a range of salient issues to support physicians in developing their knowledge and effectiveness in day-to-day clinical practice. The journal endeavours to support the continuous medical education of specialist and general cardiologists and disseminate knowledge of the field to the wider cardiovascular community.