Appropriate selection of patient, device, timing, and endpoints is essential for optimizing outcomes with mechanical circulatory support in advanced heart failure.
Supports individualized MCS selection in advanced HF; leaves open standardized criteria for prospective trials.
Despite the progress in medical therapy, advanced heart failure (AHF) remains a global epidemic with high morbidity and mortality. Novel cardiac support strategies such as pharmacologic agents, mechanical circulatory support (MCS), and cell- or matrix-based therapies are promising for these patients. The indications, types, and timing of MCS implantation depend to a large extent on the presentation, clinical status of the patient, underlying etiology, and long-term prospects. The presence or absence of end-organ damage has a significant impact on prognosis following MCS initiation. Although many patients with acute AHF may have end-organ damage, their prospect of recovery, once appropriate therapy is instituted, is better than for patients who had AHF for longer periods of time. We consider the multidisciplinary approaches used for the management of AHF and the novel cardiac support strategies (eg, MCS). Appropriate selection of patient, device, time, and end point is essential for better outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
El‐Menyar et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: