This patient presented in the third trimester with new severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVEF 20%) and progressive end-organ hypoperfusion with rising lactate level, oliguria, and acute kidney injury despite initial diuresis. This clinical picture is consistent with PPCM complicated by evolving CS. PPCM is a diagnosis of exclusion defined by new-onset HF with reduced ejection fraction in the late third trimester or early postpartum period in the absence of another identifiable cause. The hemodynamic profile is cold and wet CS, characterized by reduced cardiac output (CO) with persistent congestion. The primary abnormality is impaired forward flow.

Initiating dobutamine to augment CO is the most appropriate management strategy for her. Intravenous dobutamine directly addresses the primary hemodynamic abnormality by augmenting cardiac contractility and improving end-organ perfusion. Among the available inotropes, dobutamine is the preferred agent in pregnancy based on extensive safety data; there is limited clinical experience with the use of milrinone in pregnant patients, making dobutamine the more established choice.^1,2 Importantly, adequate CO in the pregnant patient is essential for uteroplacental perfusion; untreated CS poses significant risk to both the pregnant patient and the fetus.³ If hemodynamics fail to improve with inotropic support, early escalation to mechanical circulatory support (MCS) should be considered, with device selection and timing determined in collaboration with a multidisciplinary cardio-obstetrics team.³

Oral hydralazine and isosorbide dinitrate are appropriate vasodilators in the pregnant patient with HF. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers are contraindicated in pregnancy, making this combination a guideline-recommended alternative for afterload reduction.^3,4 However, in the setting of evolving CS with a borderline BP of 94/62 mm Hg and severely reduced CO, vasodilator therapy risks further reducing systemic perfusion pressure and worsening end-organ hypoperfusion.⁵ Afterload reduction would have a role in this patient's longitudinal management, but not until hemodynamic stability had been restored with inotropic support.

In PPCM, oxidative stress promotes cleavage of prolactin by cathepsin D into a cardiotoxic 16 kDa fragment that impairs cardiac microvascular function and promotes cardiomyocyte apoptosis. Bromocriptine, a dopamine agonist, suppresses prolactin secretion and interrupts this pathogenic pathway.⁶ The 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of HF discuss bromocriptine in supporting text without a formal recommendation class, noting its use may be considered in patients with LVEF <35%, accompanied by at least prophylactic anticoagulation given its prothrombotic risk.³ Notably, the guidelines emphasize that the efficacy and safety of bromocriptine in the setting of contemporary CS management remains uncertain.³

Bromocriptine promotes myocardial recovery over weeks to months. Randomized controlled trial data demonstrate LVEF improvement at 2 weeks with continued gains through 6 and 12 months, but it does not provide immediate hemodynamic support.⁷ In evolving CS with lactate level 4.2 mmol/L and worsening end-organ perfusion, the immediate priority is restoration of CO. Bromocriptine might have a role in her recovery trajectory once she delivered and hemodynamic stability were achieved, but it would not be the intervention needed at present.

Fetal well-being is an essential consideration in the management of any critically ill pregnant patient, and continuous fetal monitoring is an important component of care. However, transferring this patient to the obstetrics floor would move her away from the level of hemodynamic monitoring, nursing expertise, and rapid intervention capability that her condition required. In evolving CS with lactate level 4.2 mmol/L, worsening end-organ hypoperfusion, and LVEF 20%, she required CICU-level care with invasive hemodynamic monitoring, titration of vasoactive medications, and readiness for escalation to MCS if needed.³ These resources are not available on the obstetrics floor. The appropriate model for her would not be transferring her to obstetrics but rather integrating obstetric expertise into the CICU through a multidisciplinary cardio-obstetrics team by bringing together cardiologists, obstetricians, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, and critical care nurses to allow simultaneous optimization of her hemodynamics and fetal surveillance.¹ Notably, continuous fetal monitoring implemented within the CICU serves a dual purpose—tracking the fetus's well-being and reflecting the pregnant patient's end-organ function—because changes in fetal HR variability or new decelerations may signal worsening hemodynamic status in the pregnant patient.²

Urgent cesarean delivery is an appropriate intervention in specific circumstances, including refractory hemodynamic instability in the pregnant patient despite optimal medical therapy and evidence of fetal compromise.^3,6 However, neither condition was met in this case. This patient had not yet received inotropic support, and no fetal distress had been documented. Cesarean delivery in patients with cardiomyopathy is associated with approximately twofold higher odds of severe morbidity in the pregnant patient and major blood transfusion compared with vaginal delivery—an important consideration in an already hemodynamically unstable patient.⁸

Uterine contractions autotransfuse approximately 300-500 mL of blood into the systemic circulation, acutely increasing preload with each contraction.⁹ Following delivery, relief of aortocaval compression and mobilization of extravascular fluid further augment venous return, with CO increasing as much as 60-80% above prelabor values in the immediate postpartum period. In a patient with LVEF 20% and already-elevated filling pressures, these abrupt hemodynamic shifts can precipitate acute pulmonary edema and cardiovascular decompensation.⁹ Additionally, delivery eliminates the low-resistance placental circuit, increasing systemic vascular resistance and imposing additional afterload on an already-failing ventricle.⁹ The timing and mode of delivery should be determined collaboratively by the cardio-obstetrics team on the basis of the pregnant patient's hemodynamic response to therapy, gestational age, and fetal status.⁶

References

1. DeFilippis EM, Bhagra C, Casale J, et al. Cardio-obstetrics and heart failure: JACC: Heart Failure state-of-the-art review. JACC Heart Fail. 2023;11(9):1165-1180. doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2023.07.009
2. Gewarges M, Cao A, Alexopoulos K, et al. Caring for two: management of the critically ill cardiac patient during pregnancy. JACC Adv. 2025;4(10 Pt 1):102037. doi:10.1016/j.jacadv.2025.102037
3. Heidenreich PA, Bozkurt B, Aguilar D, et al. 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79(17):e263-e421. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.12.012
4. Bello NA, Bairey Merz CN, Brown H, et al. Diagnostic cardiovascular imaging and therapeutic strategies in pregnancy: JACC focus seminar 4/5. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77(14):1813-1822. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.01.056
5. Sinha SS, Morrow DA, Kapur NK, Kataria R, Roswell RO. 2025 concise clinical guidance: an ACC expert consensus statement on the evaluation and management of cardiogenic shock: a report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2025;85(16):1618-1641. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2025.02.018
6. Sliwa K, Hilfiker-Kleiner D, Damasceno A, et al. Peripartum cardiomyopathy. Lancet. 2025;406(10518):2483-2493. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(25)01451-5
7. Davis MB, Arany Z, McNamara DM, Goland S, Elkayam U. Peripartum cardiomyopathy: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;75(2):207-221. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2019.11.014
8. Meng ML, Federspiel JJ, Fuller M, et al. Severe maternal morbidity according to mode of delivery among pregnant patients with cardiomyopathies. JACC Heart Fail. 2023;11(12):1678-1689. doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2023.09.012
9. Lau ES, Aggarwal NR, Briller JE, et al. Recommendations for the management of high-risk cardiac delivery: ACC Cardiovascular Disease in Women Committee Panel. JACC Adv. 2024;3(4):100901. Published 2024 Mar 18. doi:10.1016/j.jacadv.2024.100901