Grosman-Rimon Liza, Billia Filio, Kobulnik Jeremy, Pollock Bar-Ziv Stacey, Cherney David Z, Rao Vivek
From the Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Institute, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
Cardiol Rev. 2018 Nov/Dec;26(6):294-301. doi: 10.1097/CRD.0000000000000202.
Over the past few decades, left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support has extended the lives of many patients with end-stage heart failure. The most common devices are continuous-flow (CF) LVADs. The use of the CF-LVADs has required that clinicians learn the physiological and clinical consequences of long-term continuous blood flow. While this alteration in the normal physiology still offers advantages from mechanical circulatory support, the lack of pulsatility may also increase the likelihood of adverse events. However, it is currently unknown whether newly evolved devices should incorporate pulsatility. In this article, we discuss the possible benefits of incorporating pulsatility, while maintaining the benefits of the CF-LVAD, to maximize the treatment of patients.
在过去几十年中,左心室辅助装置(LVAD)支持延长了许多终末期心力衰竭患者的生命。最常见的装置是连续血流(CF)左心室辅助装置。使用CF-LVAD要求临床医生了解长期连续血流的生理和临床后果。虽然这种正常生理状态的改变仍为机械循环支持带来优势,但缺乏搏动性也可能增加不良事件的发生可能性。然而,目前尚不清楚新研发的装置是否应具备搏动性。在本文中,我们讨论了在保持CF-LVAD优势的同时纳入搏动性的潜在益处,以实现对患者的最佳治疗。