Limitations
The current study has several limitations. First, this was a
retrospective, observational study. It does not compare or contrast
potential treatment strategies for the patient in cardiogenic shock, but
is rather aimed at describing a single center experience with
conventional cardiac surgery in this patient population. Therefore, the
scope of this study was not to create any inferences with regard to the
utility of cardiac surgical procedures versus other non-surgical or
medical treatments in these patients. Furthermore, the database utilized
for this study captures only patients with cardiogenic shock that
underwent cardiac surgery within our institution. As a result, we are
unable to comment on rates of overall survival of cardiogenic shock
within our institution. There exists potential for selection bias, as it
is likely that a significant portion of patients presenting with
cardiogenic shock were turned down for surgical intervention. As a
result, patients who were less ill and/or had decreased comorbidity
burden were likely selected for surgery. Finally, the granularity of
decision-making in these complex patients could not be fully captured.