English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Terminal heart failure (HF) is the most prevalent cause of death in the Western world and the implantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has become the gold standard therapy today. Most of the actually implanted devices are driven at a constant speed (CS) regardless of the patient’s physiological demand. A new physiological controller [power ratio (PR) controller], which keeps a constant ratio between LVAD power and left ventricular power, a previous concept [preload responsive speed (PRS) controller], which adds a variable LVAD power to reach a defined stroke work, and a CS controller were compared with an unimpaired ventricle in a full heart computer simulation model. The effects of changes in preload, afterload and left ventricular contractility are displayed by global hemodynamics and ventricular pressure-volume loops. Both physiological controllers demonstrated the desired load dependency, whereas the PR controller exceeded the PRS controller in response to an increased load and contractility. Response was inferior when preload or contractility was decreased. Thus, the PR controller might lead to an increased exercise tolerance of the patient. Additional studies are required to evaluate the controllers  in vivo .

Comparison of novel physiological load-adaptive control strategies for ventricular assist devices