This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kirklin, J. K. Articles by Naftel, D. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kirklin, J. K. Articles by Naftel, D. C. Related Collections Other heart failure CV surgery: transplantation, ventricular assistance, cardiomyopathy

Advances in Heart Failure

Mechanical Circulatory Support

Registering a Therapy in Evolution

James K. Kirklin, MD and David C. Naftel, PhD

From the Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala.

Correspondence to James K. Kirklin, MD, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294. E-mail jkirklin@uab.edu and pholmes@uab.edu

Received March 26, 2008; accepted June 5, 2008.

Key Words: heart failure • mechanical circulatory support • transplantation

An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.

	Introduction

 
The development of durable mechanical circulatory support systems paralleled the expansion of cardiac transplantation. The National Institutes of Health sponsored grants in the 1980s to develop implantable left heart assist systems; 20 years later, they contracted for a national registry, the Interagency Registry for Mechanical Assisted Circulatory Support, to track the clinical evolution of this new technology. The Interagency Registry for Mechanical Assisted Circulatory Support has refined the classification of New York Heart Association class IV heart failure, standardized adverse event definitions, and explored outcomes of device type, location, and strategy. The majority of mechanical circulatory support patients are between the ages of 50 and 70 years, and 90% of patients are in the highest levels of clinical instability before implantation. Six-month survival after device implant is 75%, but it increases to 80% among those not in shock at implantation. Patients who require biventricular support have decreased survival. As longer-term outcomes are analyzed, improved outcomes may justify triage of high-risk patients awaiting heart transplantation to chronic mechanical circulatory support.

	Developmental History of Mechanical Circulatory Support

 
The application of mechanical circulatory support in animal experiments can be traced back to the work of Carrel and Lindberg in the 1930s.^1,2 With the initial foray into open-heart surgery in the 1950s,^3,4 the stage was set for application of more prolonged mechanical support for myocardial recovery in situations of failure to wean from cardiopulmonary bypass. Although initial reports of successful recovery used roller-pump technology,⁵ their applicability was limited by issues of blood trauma and difficulties in modulation of pump speed . . . [Full Text of this Article]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. R. Wilson, G. H. Mudge Jr, G. C. Stewart, and M. M. Givertz Evaluation for a Ventricular Assist Device: Selecting the Appropriate Candidate Circulation, April 28, 2009; 119(16): 2225 - 2232. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. D. Ascheim, A. C. Gelijns, and E. A. Rose Innovation With Experience Using Implantable Left Ventricular Assist Devices Circ Heart Fail, January 1, 2009; 2(1): 1 - 2. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. F. Hernandez, A. M. Shea, C. A. Milano, J. G. Rogers, B. G. Hammill, C. M. O'Connor, K. A. Schulman, E. D. Peterson, and L. H. Curtis Long-term Outcomes and Costs of Ventricular Assist Devices Among Medicare Beneficiaries JAMA, November 26, 2008; 300(20): 2398 - 2406. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]