Open AccessClinical Choices for Circulatory Assist Devices
Author(s) -
Ott Ra,
Mills Tc,
John Eugene,
Gazzaniga Ab
Publication year - 1990
Publication title -
asaio transactions
Language(s) - Uncategorized
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2375-0952
pISSN - 0889-7190
DOI - 10.1097/00002480-199010000-00003
Subject(s) - bridge to transplantation , medicine , transplantation , intensive care medicine , ventricular assist device , pulsatile flow , heart transplantation , circulatory system , bridge (graph theory) , surgery , heart failure , cardiology
Approximately 1.0% of open heart surgery patients become unweanable from cardiac bypass during the surgical procedure. In addition, nearly 20% of patients accepted for cardiac transplantation die while waiting for a donor heart. Pulsatile pneumatic ventricular assist devices (VADs) provide a realistic solution to these dilemmas. Currently, there are five manufacturers who are competing for the major market share in the clinical use of these devices. Novacor, Thermetics, Thoratec, Symbion, and Abiomed all have competitive VAD systems. Because no one system is optimal for all patients, the limitations, similarities, and strengths of each system should be known to enhance the patient's outcome when using these devices. Successful use of VAD systems, either as a bridge to transplantation or to ventricular recovery, is best approached by adherence to strict patient selection. Once instituted, VAD management centers on detailed attention to anticoagulation and prompt diagnosis and treatment of various complications.