Why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge

Abstract

Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have become standard therapy option for patients with advanced heart failure. They offer several advantages over previously used pulsatile-flow LVADs, including improved durability, less surgical trauma, higher energy efficiency, and lower thrombogenicity. These benefits translate into better survival, lower frequency of adverse events, improved quality of life, and higher functional capacity of patients. However, mounting evidence shows unanticipated consequences of continuous-flow support, such as acquired aortic valve insufficiency and acquired von Willebrand syndrome. In this review article we discuss current evidence on differences between continuous and pulsatile mechanical circulatory support, with a focus on clinical implications and potential benefits of pulsatile flow.