Cargando…
Why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge
Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have become standard therapy option for patients with advanced heart failure. They offer several advantages over previously used pulsatile-flow LVADs, including improved durability, less surgical trauma, higher energy efficiency, and lower throm...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Croatian Medical Schools
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4295069/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25559832 http://dx.doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2014.55.609 |
_version_ | 1782352786241880064 |
---|---|
author | Barić, Davor |
author_facet | Barić, Davor |
author_sort | Barić, Davor |
collection | PubMed |
description | Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have become standard therapy option for patients with advanced heart failure. They offer several advantages over previously used pulsatile-flow LVADs, including improved durability, less surgical trauma, higher energy efficiency, and lower thrombogenicity. These benefits translate into better survival, lower frequency of adverse events, improved quality of life, and higher functional capacity of patients. However, mounting evidence shows unanticipated consequences of continuous-flow support, such as acquired aortic valve insufficiency and acquired von Willebrand syndrome. In this review article we discuss current evidence on differences between continuous and pulsatile mechanical circulatory support, with a focus on clinical implications and potential benefits of pulsatile flow. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4295069 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Croatian Medical Schools |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42950692015-01-21 Why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge Barić, Davor Croat Med J Advanced Heart Failure Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have become standard therapy option for patients with advanced heart failure. They offer several advantages over previously used pulsatile-flow LVADs, including improved durability, less surgical trauma, higher energy efficiency, and lower thrombogenicity. These benefits translate into better survival, lower frequency of adverse events, improved quality of life, and higher functional capacity of patients. However, mounting evidence shows unanticipated consequences of continuous-flow support, such as acquired aortic valve insufficiency and acquired von Willebrand syndrome. In this review article we discuss current evidence on differences between continuous and pulsatile mechanical circulatory support, with a focus on clinical implications and potential benefits of pulsatile flow. Croatian Medical Schools 2014-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4295069/ /pubmed/25559832 http://dx.doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2014.55.609 Text en Copyright © 2014 by the Croatian Medical Journal. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Advanced Heart Failure Barić, Davor Why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge |
title | Why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge |
title_full | Why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge |
title_fullStr | Why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge |
title_full_unstemmed | Why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge |
title_short | Why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge |
title_sort | why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge |
topic | Advanced Heart Failure |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4295069/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25559832 http://dx.doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2014.55.609 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT baricdavor whypulsatilitystillmattersareviewofcurrentknowledge |