))
Mechanical circulatory support for cardiogenic shock: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score-matched studies
Manage episode 423121934 series 3308934
Conteúdo fornecido por ESICM. Todo o conteúdo do podcast, incluindo episódios, gráficos e descrições de podcast, é carregado e fornecido diretamente por ESICM ou por seu parceiro de plataforma de podcast. Se você acredita que alguém está usando seu trabalho protegido por direitos autorais sem sua permissão, siga o processo descrito aqui https://pt.player.fm/legal.
Cardiogenic shock accounts for up to 5% of acute heart failure presentations and around 14–16% of patients reported in cardiac intensive care datasets. It complicates up to 15% of all myocardial infarctions and is the leading cause of death post-infarction. Using pharmacological agents alone may increase left ventricular afterload and myocardial oxygen demand, resulting in complications. Thus, mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices have emerged as important therapeutic options. As evidence remains uncertain, MCS selection depends on clinician preference and local availability.
An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of high-quality RCTs and propensity score-matched studies (PSMs) was performed to compare the outcomes of MCS devices with no MCS and each other and investigate which MCS is the most effective in reducing mortality.
To learn more about the findings of this study listen to this podcast.
76 episódios
Compartilhar
