Key result
Review traces LVAD evolution from first-generation pulsatile to third-generation centrifugal flow devices.
Why the study?
Durable left ventricular assist devices have evolved significantly across generations, raising the question of what has fundamentally changed.
This review summarizes the technological evolution of left ventricular assist devices from first-generation pulsatile to third-generation centrifugal flow devices.
Provides context for LVAD selection amid generational shifts; leaves open updated outcome comparisons in contemporary cohorts.
The field of durable left ventricular assist devices has advanced dramatically since its introduction into the clinical realm. From the first-generation pulsatile HeartMate XVE device to the second-generation continuous axial flow HeartMate-2 to the current third-generation centrifugal flow devices, the left ventricular assist device has undergone significant evolution. This review describes the technology and its changes over the course of time, with a focus on the fundamental question: Has anything changed?
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Levine et al. (2019) conducted a review in Heart failure requiring left ventricular assist device. Third-generation left ventricular assist devices vs. First- and second-generation left ventricular assist devices was evaluated. This review describes the technological evolution of left ventricular assist devices from first-generation pulsatile to third-generation centrifugal flow devices.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: