临床前模型如何帮助改善心源性休克的预后?

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Current Opinion in Critical Care Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-06 DOI:10.1097/MCC.0000000000001170
Alexander Moiroux-Sahraoui, Francesca Manicone, Antoine Herpain
{"title":"临床前模型如何帮助改善心源性休克的预后?","authors":"Alexander Moiroux-Sahraoui, Francesca Manicone, Antoine Herpain","doi":"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Preclinical experimentation of cardiogenic shock resuscitation on large animal models represents a powerful tool to decipher its complexity and improve its poor outcome, when small animal models are lacking external validation, and clinical investigation are limited due to technical and ethical constraints. This review illustrates the currently available preclinical models addressing reliably the physiopathology and hemodynamic phenotype of cardiogenic shock, highlighting on the opposite questionable translation based on low severity acute myocardial infarction (AMI) models.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Three types of preclinical models replicate reliably AMI-related cardiogenic shock, either with coronary microembolization, coronary deoxygenated blood perfusion or double critical coronary sub-occlusion. These models overcame the pitfall of frequent periprocedural cardiac arrest and offer, to different extents, robust opportunities to investigate pharmacological and/or mechanical circulatory support therapeutic strategies, cardioprotective approaches improving heart recovery and mitigation of the systemic inflammatory reaction. They all came with their respective strengths and weaknesses, allowing the researcher to select the right preclinical model for the right clinical question.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>AMI-related cardiogenic shock preclinical models are now well established and should replace low severity AMI models. Technical and ethical constraints are not trivial, but this translational research is a key asset to build up meaningful future clinical investigations.</p>","PeriodicalId":10851,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How preclinical models help to improve outcome in cardiogenic shock.\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Moiroux-Sahraoui, Francesca Manicone, Antoine Herpain\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001170\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Preclinical experimentation of cardiogenic shock resuscitation on large animal models represents a powerful tool to decipher its complexity and improve its poor outcome, when small animal models are lacking external validation, and clinical investigation are limited due to technical and ethical constraints. This review illustrates the currently available preclinical models addressing reliably the physiopathology and hemodynamic phenotype of cardiogenic shock, highlighting on the opposite questionable translation based on low severity acute myocardial infarction (AMI) models.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Three types of preclinical models replicate reliably AMI-related cardiogenic shock, either with coronary microembolization, coronary deoxygenated blood perfusion or double critical coronary sub-occlusion. These models overcame the pitfall of frequent periprocedural cardiac arrest and offer, to different extents, robust opportunities to investigate pharmacological and/or mechanical circulatory support therapeutic strategies, cardioprotective approaches improving heart recovery and mitigation of the systemic inflammatory reaction. They all came with their respective strengths and weaknesses, allowing the researcher to select the right preclinical model for the right clinical question.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>AMI-related cardiogenic shock preclinical models are now well established and should replace low severity AMI models. Technical and ethical constraints are not trivial, but this translational research is a key asset to build up meaningful future clinical investigations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10851,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001170\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001170","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述的目的:在小动物模型缺乏外部验证、临床研究因技术和伦理限制而受到限制的情况下,通过大型动物模型进行心源性休克复苏的临床前实验是破解其复杂性和改善其不良预后的有力工具。本综述介绍了目前可用的临床前模型,这些模型可靠地反映了心源性休克的生理病理和血流动力学表型,同时强调了基于低严重度急性心肌梗死(AMI)模型的反向转化问题:三种临床前模型可靠地复制了急性心肌梗死相关的心源性休克,包括冠状动脉微栓塞、冠状动脉脱氧血液灌注或双临界冠状动脉次闭塞。这些模型克服了围手术期心脏骤停频繁发生的缺陷,在不同程度上为研究药物和/或机械循环支持治疗策略、改善心脏恢复的心脏保护方法以及减轻全身炎症反应提供了有力的机会。总结:急性心肌梗死相关心源性休克临床前模型现已成熟,应取代低严重程度急性心肌梗死模型。技术和伦理方面的限制并非微不足道,但这项转化研究是未来开展有意义的临床研究的关键资产。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How preclinical models help to improve outcome in cardiogenic shock.

Purpose of review: Preclinical experimentation of cardiogenic shock resuscitation on large animal models represents a powerful tool to decipher its complexity and improve its poor outcome, when small animal models are lacking external validation, and clinical investigation are limited due to technical and ethical constraints. This review illustrates the currently available preclinical models addressing reliably the physiopathology and hemodynamic phenotype of cardiogenic shock, highlighting on the opposite questionable translation based on low severity acute myocardial infarction (AMI) models.

Recent findings: Three types of preclinical models replicate reliably AMI-related cardiogenic shock, either with coronary microembolization, coronary deoxygenated blood perfusion or double critical coronary sub-occlusion. These models overcame the pitfall of frequent periprocedural cardiac arrest and offer, to different extents, robust opportunities to investigate pharmacological and/or mechanical circulatory support therapeutic strategies, cardioprotective approaches improving heart recovery and mitigation of the systemic inflammatory reaction. They all came with their respective strengths and weaknesses, allowing the researcher to select the right preclinical model for the right clinical question.

Summary: AMI-related cardiogenic shock preclinical models are now well established and should replace low severity AMI models. Technical and ethical constraints are not trivial, but this translational research is a key asset to build up meaningful future clinical investigations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Critical Care
Current Opinion in Critical Care 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
172
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​​Current Opinion in Critical Care delivers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and most exciting developments in critical care from across the world. Published bimonthly and featuring thirteen key topics – including the respiratory system, neuroscience, trauma and infectious diseases – the journal’s renowned team of guest editors ensure a balanced, expert assessment of the recently published literature in each respective field with insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信