Pulsatile vs. continuous flow in ventricular assist device therapy

Abstract

A left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is an important treatment option for a patient with end-stage heart failure. Both continuous and non-pulsatile devices are available, each with different effects on a patient's physiology. In general, these effects are not clinically significant with the exception of bleeding events which are more common with continuous-flow devices in some series. Both devices increase survival beyond medical management. Continuous-flow devices are smaller and are associated with less overall morbidity than pulsatile devices.