Key result
Isolated right ventricular assist devices resulted in a 2-year survival of 41.3%, which was similar to biventricular assist devices (45.2%) but significantly lower than left ventricular assist devices (69.0%).
Why the study?
Outcomes with isolated right ventricular assist devices using pumps designed for the left ventricle are not well described.
How does 2-year survival with isolated right ventricular assist devices compare to LVAD and BiVAD in patients requiring mechanical circulatory support?
Cohort (n=20,789)
Yes
How does 2-year survival with isolated right ventricular assist devices compare to LVAD and BiVAD in patients requiring mechanical circulatory support?
Long-term isolated right ventricular assist device support is feasible for primary right heart failure, with 2-year survival comparable to biventricular support but lower than isolated left ventricular support.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
iRVAD survival matches BiVAD but trails LVAD; leaves open optimal support strategies for isolated RV failure pending prospective data.
Outcomes with isolated right ventricular assist devices (iRVAD) using pumps designed for the left ventricle are not well described. This study compares the clinical characteristics and outcomes of iRVAD patients to those patients treated with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) and biventricular assist devices (BiVAD). This study consisted of patients who received iRVAD from the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) registry (2006-2017). The primary outcome was 2-year survival. Of 20,789 patients, 26 (0.13%) received iRVAD, 17 with pulsatile flow and 9 with continuous-flow devices. Device strategy was bridge to recovery/rescue therapy in 9 (35%), bridge to transplant/decision in 14 (52%), and destination therapy in 3 (12%). Twelve (46%) patients were INTERMACS profile 1, 5 patients (19%) required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and 13 (50%) needed mechanical ventilation. Two-year survival for patients with iRVAD (41.3%) was similar to BiVAD (45.2%) and significantly lower than LVAD (69.0%). In patients with isolated right-sided failure, long-term iRVAD support is feasible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Birati et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Primary right heart failure requiring mechanical circulatory support (n=20,789). Isolated right ventricular assist device (iRVAD) vs. Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) and biventricular assist devices (BiVAD) was evaluated on 2-year survival. Isolated right ventricular assist devices resulted in a 2-year survival of 41.3%, which was similar to biventricular assist devices (45.2%) but significantly lower than left ventricular assist devices (69.0%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: