Author + information
- Received December 14, 2015
- Revision received January 29, 2016
- Accepted February 1, 2016
- Published online May 9, 2016.
- Tamara M. Atkinson, MDa,
- E. Magnus Ohman, MDb,
- William W. O’Neill, MDc,
- Tanveer Rab, MDd,
- Joaquin E. Cigarroa, MDa,∗ (, )
- Interventional Scientific Council of the American College of Cardiology
- aKnight Cardiovascular Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon
- bDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
- cDivision of Cardiology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan
- dDivision of Cardiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia
- ↵∗Reprint requests and correspondence:
Dr. Joaquin E. Cigarroa, MD, Knight Cardiovascular Institute, Cardiovascular Division, UHN-62, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 Southwest Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, Oregon 97239.
Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support has been used to stabilize patients in cardiogenic shock and provide hemodynamic support during high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions for several decades. The goal of this paper is to provide a practical approach to percutaneous mechanical circulatory support in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with cardiogenic shock and/or high risk features to aid in decision making for interventional cardiologists.
This manuscript does not reflect the opinion of the American College of Cardiology or the JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions. Dr. Ohman has served as a consultant for Abiomed, AstraZeneca, Biotie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly & Company, Faculty Connection, Gilead Sciences, Janseen Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Stealth Peptides, Medscape, The Medicines Company, and WebMD; and has received research grant support from Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly & Company, Gilead Sciences, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. Dr. O’Neill has served as a consultant for Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and St. Jude Medical. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.
- Received December 14, 2015.
- Revision received January 29, 2016.
- Accepted February 1, 2016.
- American College of Cardiology Foundation
- Populations Requiring Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support
- Percutaneous Mechanical Support Devices Available and Trial Data
- Practical Approach to Percutaneous MCS in Cardiogenic Shock, HR-PCI, and Cardiogenic Shock After Cardiac Arrest With and Without ROSC
- Implementation of a Successful Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Program