Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Shock Teams: A Contemporary Review. [Review]

MedStar author(s):

Kenigsberg, Benjamin B

, MHVI

Papolos, Alexander I

, MHVI

Singam, Narayana Sarma V

, MHVI

Stevenson, Margaret J

, MHVI

Citation: Current Cardiology Reports. 2023 Oct 20PMID: 37861851Institution: MedStar Heart & Vascular InstituteForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal Article | ReviewSubject headings: IN PROCESS -- NOT YET INDEXEDYear: 2023 ISSN:

1523-3782

Name of journal: Current cardiology reportsAbstract: PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a time-sensitive and often fatal condition. To address this issue, many centers have developed multidisciplinary shock teams with a common goal of expediting the recognition and treatment of CS. In this review, we examine the mission, structure, implementation, and outcomes reported by these early shock teams.RECENT FINDINGS: To date, there have been four observational shock team analyses, each providing unique insight into the utility of the shock team. The limited available data supports that shock teams are associated with improved CS mortality. However, there is considerable operational heterogeneity among shock teams, and randomized data assessing their value and best practices in both local and regional care models are needed. Copyright © 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.All authors: Stevenson MJ, Kenigsberg BB, Singam NSV, Papolos AIFiscal year: FY2024 Digital Object Identifier:

https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11886-023-01983-7

ORCID:

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6045-5988

Date added to catalog: 2024-01-22

Holdings ( 1 )
Title notes ( 3 )

Holdings
Item type	Current library	Collection	Call number	Status	Date due	Barcode
Journal Article	MedStar Authors Catalog	Article	37861851	Available		37861851

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a time-sensitive and often fatal condition. To address this issue, many centers have developed multidisciplinary shock teams with a common goal of expediting the recognition and treatment of CS. In this review, we examine the mission, structure, implementation, and outcomes reported by these early shock teams.

RECENT FINDINGS: To date, there have been four observational shock team analyses, each providing unique insight into the utility of the shock team. The limited available data supports that shock teams are associated with improved CS mortality. However, there is considerable operational heterogeneity among shock teams, and randomized data assessing their value and best practices in both local and regional care models are needed. Copyright © 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

English