CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

充血性心力衰竭

科研文章

荐读文献

Lower Risk of Heart Failure and Death in Patients Initiated on SGLT-2 Inhibitors Versus Other Glucose-Lowering Drugs: The CVD-REAL Study Improving the Use of Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators Therapy With Validated Patient-Centric Risk Estimates Progression of Device-Detected Subclinical Atrial Fibrillation and the Risk of Heart Failure Good response to tolvaptan shortens hospitalization in patients with congestive heart failure Respiratory Syncytial Virus and Associations With Cardiovascular Disease in Adults Can We Use the Intrinsic Left Ventricular Delay (QLV) to Optimize the Pacing Configuration for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With a Quadripolar Left Ventricular Lead? Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Systems HFpEF: From Mechanisms to Therapies Ranolazine in High-Risk Patients With Implanted Cardioverter-Defibrillators - The RAID Trial Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: from mechanisms to therapies

Review Article2020 Sep 21;S0033-0620(20)30158-4.

JOURNAL:Prog Cardiovasc Dis. Article Link

Mechanical circulatory support devices in advanced heart failure: 2020 and beyond

JL Vieira, HO Ventura, MR Mehra et al. Keywords: advanced heart failure; cardiogenic shock; hemocompatibility; INTERMACS; LVAD; left ventricular assist device; mechanical circulatory support

ABSTRACT

Substantial progress in the field of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has expanded the treatment options for patients with advanced-stage heart failure (HF). Currently available MCS devices can be implanted percutaneously or surgically. They can also be configured to support the left, right, or both ventricles, offering varying levels of circulatory support. Short-term temporary MCS devices are primarily used in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention, cardiogenic shock, and post-cardiac arrest, while durable left ventricular assist systems (LVAS) are increasingly utilized either as a bridge-to-transplant, bridge to decision, or as a destination therapy. The evolution from older pulsatile devices to continuous-flow LVAS and the incorporation of smaller pumps, with no valves, fewer moving parts, and improved hemocompatibility has translated into improved clinical outcomes, greater durability, fewer adverse events, and reduced overall cost of care. However, despite marked advances in device design and clinical management, determining MCS candidacy is often difficult and requires the integration of clinical, biomarker, imaging, exercise, and hemodynamic data. This review aims to provide a summary of the current use of short-term and durable MCS devices in the treatment of advanced-stage HF, highlighting several aspects of LVAS support and the challenges that remain.