{
  "abstract": "Cardiogenic shock (CS) following acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains one of cardiology’s most formidable challenges, carrying a mortality rate that stubbornly persists around 40–50% despite decades of therapeutic advances.1 In this high-stakes clinical scenario, mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices have emerged as potential lifelines, with intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) and percutaneous ventricular assist devices (PVAD) representing the most commonly deployed options. Yet, as Verma and colleagues demonstrate in their important study published in this issue, the selection between these technologies remains strikingly variable across institutions, raising fundamental questions about how we approach this critical therapeutic decision.2",
  "authors": [
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan, USA"
      ],
      "name": "Ahmad Jabri"
    },
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan, USA"
      ],
      "name": "Sant Kumar"
    },
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, USA"
      ],
      "name": "Pedro Villablanca"
    }
  ],
  "title": "Beyond the shock: standardising mechanical circulatory support in acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock",
  "uid": "1d6f174b-3826-52c6-adf9-564fa0e9d01d"
}