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.