Right Ventricular Failure—A Continuing Problem in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Device Support
- 1 September 2010
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in Journal of Cardiovascular Translational Research
- Vol. 3 (6) , 604-611
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s12265-010-9216-4
Abstract
The discrepancy between the limited availability of donor hearts and the ever-increasing number of patients with heart failure has led to the increasing use of left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) as a bridge to transplant. One of the main complications inherent following institution of LVAD therapy is right ventricular (RV) failure, manifested by the need for inotropic and/or nitric oxide support >14 days after LVAD implant and/or the need for right-sided mechanical circulatory support. RV failure is a major contributor of significant morbidity and mortality after LVAD placement. The complex pathophysiology of RV failure, which could potentially be related to RV myocardial dysfunction, interventricular dependence, and RV afterload, has led to inconsistencies in predicting risk factors for RV dysfunction. Several strategies have evolved over the years of experience with mechanical circulatory support that have aimed to avoid as well as reduce the incidence of RV failure. It is imperative that patients who definitely need biventricular support are identified. Despite the numerous risk factors identified in many studies as well as the development of risk factor profile scores, this continues to be a challenging problem. However, the lower incidence of RV failure following LVAD in the current era is encouraging, suggesting a favorable relationship between RV unloading and function, and continuous-flow physiology.Keywords
This publication has 44 references indexed in Scilit:
- Risk Factors Predictive of Right Ventricular Failure After Left Ventricular Assist Device ImplantationThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2010
- Advanced Heart Failure Treated with Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist DeviceNew England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Effects of Centrifugal, Axial, and Pulsatile Left Ventricular Assist Device Support on End-Organ Function in Heart Failure PatientsThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2009
- Risk Score Derived from Pre-operative Data Analysis Predicts the Need for Biventricular Mechanical Circulatory SupportThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2008
- The Right Ventricular Failure Risk ScoreJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2008
- Use of a Continuous-Flow Device in Patients Awaiting Heart TransplantationNew England Journal of Medicine, 2007
- Phenotypic Assessment of Endothelial Microparticles in Patients with Heart Failure and After Heart Transplantation: Switch From Cell Activation to ApoptosisThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2005
- Cellular and Hemodynamics Responses of Failing Myocardium to Continuous Flow Mechanical Circulatory Support Using the DeBakey-Noon Left Ventricular Assist Device: a Comparative Analysis With Pulsatile-Type DevicesThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2005
- Long-Term Use of a Left Ventricular Assist Device for End-Stage Heart FailureNew England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Right ventricular function in an operating room model of mechanical left ventricular assistance and its effects in patients with depressed left ventricular function.Circulation, 1985