These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Management of cardiogenic shock: Results from a survey in France and Belgium].
    Author: Champion S, Deye N.
    Journal: Ann Cardiol Angeiol (Paris); 2017 Apr; 66(2):59-65. PubMed ID: 27836099.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: Physician survey on cardiogenic shock management; recommendations for the management of patients with cardiogenic shock are based mostly on experts' opinion. METHODS: Overall 1585 emails were sent to "senior" intensive care physicians from France and Belgium from September 2014 to march 2015. Response rate was 10% (157 respondents). Agreement was assessed based on RAND/UCLA methodology. RESULTS: Continuous monitoring of cardiac output, vascular filling, noninvasive ventilation were deemed appropriate. The use of systematic diuretics and dopamine seemed inappropriate. There was a strong agreement to use dobutamine as inotropic drug in first intention. The use of noradrenaline and adrenaline was considered appropriate. There was a strong agreement to use mechanical circulatory support, in particular extracorporeal life support, in refractory cardiogenic shock. Only 25% of responders felt that there are criteria of refractory cardiogenic shock. Concerning the objectives of systolic, diastolic and mean blood pressure, 95% of the responses were in the range between 70 to 100, 30 to 50, and 55 to 65mmHg, respectively. The target of SvO2 was between 55% and 75%, and cardiac index between 1.5 and 3L/min/m2 for 95% of responders. There was a strong agreement to maintain hemoglobin between 7 and 9.9g/dL. CONCLUSION: Based on our physician survey, we found an agreement in vascular filling and early enteral nutrition. Dobutamine and noradrenaline should be the preferred drugs, but not dopamine. Mechanical circulatory support (preferably with extracorporeal support) should be restricted to refractory cardiogenic shock. Those responses differed slightly from experts' opinion, available in terms of recommendations.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]