ECLS-SHOCK and DanGer Shock: Implications for Optimal Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support Use for Cardiogenic Shock Due to Acute Myocardial Infarction

Abstract

Despite concerted efforts to rapidly identify patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) and provide timely revascularization, early mortality remains stubbornly high. Although artificially augmenting systemic flow by using temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices would be expected to reduce the rate of progression to multiorgan dysfunction and thereby enhance survival, reliable evidence for benefit has remained elusive with lingering questions regarding the appropriate selection of both patients and devices, as well as the timing of device implantation relative to other critical interventions. Further complicating matters are the resource-intensive multidisciplinary systems of care that must be brought to bear in this complex patient population. Until recently, studies of tMCS were extremely heterogeneous in design, populations treated, and timing of device implantation with regard to shock onset and revascularization. Attempts at summarizing the available data had resulted in a lack of clear benefit for any type of tMCS modality. On this background, 2 landmark trials of tMCS in the setting of AMI-CS---ECLS-SHOCK and DanGer Shock---have recently been published with divergent results that deserve detailed consideration. Thus, we provide a detailed narrative review of the current state of knowledge regarding tMCS for AMI-CS. The most common types of tMCS and related evidence are presented, as well as evidence for organizational considerations, such as the shock team. We also provide some insight into how this new evidence may be incorporated into practice and influence future research.