Affiliations 

  • 1 Emergency Department, National Clinical Research Center of Cardiovascular Diseases, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 100037 Beijing, China; State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 100037 Beijing, China; National Clinical Research Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, 100037 Beijing, China
  • 2 Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia
  • 3 Department of Cardiac Surgery, Peking University People's Hospital, Peking University, 100044 Beijing, China
  • 4 Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences and Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, 610072 Chengdu, China
  • 5 Center of Laboratory Medicine, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 100037 Beijing, China
  • 6 Coronary Care Unit, Department of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, 100037 Beijing, China; Coronary Care Unit, Department of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shenzhen, Langshan Road 12, 518000 Shenzhen, China
  • 7 Cardiac Arrhythmia Center, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 100037 Beijing, China
  • 8 Emergency Department, National Clinical Research Center of Cardiovascular Diseases, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 100037 Beijing, China; State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 100037 Beijing, China
  • 9 Johns Hopkins Center on Aging and Immune Remodeling, Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Department of Medicine; Department of Health Policy and Management and W. Harry Feinstone Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, United States. Electronic address: sleng1@jhu.edu
  • 10 Emergency Department, National Clinical Research Center of Cardiovascular Diseases, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 100037 Beijing, China; State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 100037 Beijing, China; National Clinical Research Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, 100037 Beijing, China. Electronic address: fwywx66@fuwai.com
Trends Cardiovasc Med, 2026 Nov;36(8):542-553.
PMID: 41831808 DOI: 10.1016/j.tcm.2026.03.002

Abstract

Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a major clinical challenge, with persistently high short-term mortality despite advances in reperfusion therapy, pharmacological support, and mechanical circulatory support. This review reassesses the conceptual evolution of CS and examines why hemodynamic-centric diagnostic and therapeutic strategies have failed to yield meaningful improvements in outcomes. Historically, CS has been defined by cardiac-oriented macrocirculatory compromise, and contemporary definitions and staging systems have improved risk stratification but remain largely hemodynamics-focused and primarily validated in intensive care settings. Increasing evidence indicates that inflammatory activation, microcirculatory dysfunction, endothelial injury, and metabolic derangements are central determinants of shock progression and organ failure. Integrating multimodal diagnostic approaches-including bedside assessment of microcirculation and inflammation, omics-based phenotyping, advanced echocardiographic techniques, and artificial intelligence-assisted risk stratification-may enable earlier recognition, more precise classification, and improved risk stratification across the continuum of care. Reframing cardiogenic shock as a dynamic, multisystem disorder supports a shift from hemodynamic-centric paradigms toward multimodal precision care, with important implications for clinical management and future trial design.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.