RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in various subgroups of patients with acute cardiogenic shock, providing insights for personalized clinical decision-making. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search across major databases to identify studies that reported on the use of temporary MCS devices like TandemHeart, Impella, and VA-ECMO in acute cardiogenic shock. Special attention was given to subgroup analyses based on etiologies of shock, patient demographics, and comorbid conditions. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that while devices like TandemHeart and Impella offer significant hemodynamic support, their effectiveness and safety profiles vary across different patient subgroups. VA-ECMO demonstrated the highest flow rates and potential for mortality benefits but requires careful management due to associated risks. The lack of randomized controlled trials in specific patient subgroups highlights a gap in the current literature, underscoring the need for targeted research. CONCLUSION: The review underscores the necessity of a personalized approach in selecting temporary MCS devices for patients with acute cardiogenic shock, guided by specific patient characteristics and clinical scenarios. Future research should focus on addressing the identified evidence gaps through well-designed studies that provide robust subgroup-specific data, enabling clinicians to optimize treatment strategies and improve patient outcomes in this critical care context.
