Barić Davor
Davor Barić, Department of Cardiac Surgery and Transplantation, Dubrava University Hospital, Avenija Gojka Šuška 6, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia,
Croat Med J. 2014 Dec;55(6):609-20. doi: 10.3325/cmj.2014.55.609.
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.
连续流左心室辅助装置(LVAD)已成为晚期心力衰竭患者的标准治疗选择。与先前使用的搏动流LVAD相比,它们具有几个优点,包括提高耐用性、减少手术创伤、更高的能源效率和更低的血栓形成倾向。这些益处转化为更好的生存率、更低的不良事件发生率、更高的生活质量以及患者更高的功能能力。然而,越来越多的证据表明连续流支持会产生意想不到的后果,如获得性主动脉瓣关闭不全和获得性血管性血友病综合征。在这篇综述文章中,我们讨论了关于连续流和搏动流机械循环支持差异的当前证据,重点是搏动流的临床意义和潜在益处。