Official reprint from UpToDate®
www.uptodate.com ©2015 UpToDate®

Circulatory assist devices: Cardiopulmonary assist device and short-term left ventricular assist devices

Julian M Aroesty, MD
Valluvan Jeevanandam, MD
Howard J Eisen, MD
Section Editor
Donald Cutlip, MD
Deputy Editor
Gordon M Saperia, MD, FACC


Circulatory assist devices were initially designed to support patients in hemodynamic collapse, but are now used for a wide range of clinical conditions ranging from prophylactic insertion for invasive procedures to cardiogenic shock or cardiopulmonary arrest. There are three major types of percutaneous devices (as well as surgically-implanted ventricular assist devices):

Counterpulsation devices (intraaortic balloon pump [IABP] and noninvasive counterpulsation) (image 1)

Cardiopulmonary assist devices (Cardiopulmonary support or CPS)

Left ventricular assist devices (eg, Impella) (image 2)

The IABP is the most commonly used mechanical support device. It has a long clinical record of success, is simple, is inserted easily and rapidly, is the least expensive of all the devices, and does not require continuous monitoring by technical support personnel. (See "Intraaortic balloon pump counterpulsation".)


Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Jul 2015. | This topic last updated: Apr 27, 2015.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2015 UpToDate, Inc.
  1. Hill JG, Bruhn PS, Cohen SE, et al. Emergent applications of cardiopulmonary support: a multiinstitutional experience. Ann Thorac Surg 1992; 54:699.
  2. Kato S, Morimoto S, Hiramitsu S, et al. Use of percutaneous cardiopulmonary support of patients with fulminant myocarditis and cardiogenic shock for improving prognosis. Am J Cardiol 1999; 83:623.
  3. Shawl FA, Domanski MJ, Hernandez TJ, Punja S. Emergency percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass support in cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 1989; 64:967.
  4. Vogel RA, Shawl F, Tommaso C, et al. Initial report of the National Registry of Elective Cardiopulmonary Bypass Supported Coronary Angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 15:23.
  5. Teirstein PS, Vogel RA, Dorros G, et al. Prophylactic versus standby cardiopulmonary support for high risk percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21:590.
  6. Siegenthaler MP, Brehm K, Strecker T, et al. The Impella Recover microaxial left ventricular assist device reduces mortality for postcardiotomy failure: a three-center experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004; 127:812.
  7. Jurmann MJ, Siniawski H, Erb M, et al. Initial experience with miniature axial flow ventricular assist devices for postcardiotomy heart failure. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 77:1642.
  8. http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm439529.htm.
  9. O'Neill WW, Kleiman NS, Moses J, et al. A prospective, randomized clinical trial of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: the PROTECT II study. Circulation 2012; 126:1717.
  10. Thiele H, Lauer B, Hambrecht R, et al. Reversal of cardiogenic shock by percutaneous left atrial-to-femoral arterial bypass assistance. Circulation 2001; 104:2917.
  11. Thiele H, Sick P, Boudriot E, et al. Randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon support with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients with revascularized acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J 2005; 26:1276.
  12. Kar B, Gregoric ID, Basra SS, et al. The percutaneous ventricular assist device in severe refractory cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 57:688.
  13. Hernandez AF, Grab JD, Gammie JS, et al. A decade of short-term outcomes in post cardiac surgery ventricular assist device implantation: data from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons' National Cardiac Database. Circulation 2007; 116:606.
  14. Marelli D, Shemin RJ. Post-cardiac surgery mechanical support: a tool for decision making. Circulation 2007; 116:586.
  15. Hernandez AF, Shea AM, Milano CA, et al. Long-term outcomes and costs of ventricular assist devices among Medicare beneficiaries. JAMA 2008; 300:2398.
  16. Simon D, Fischer S, Grossman A, et al. Left ventricular assist device-related infection: treatment and outcome. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 40:1108.
  17. Herrmann M, Weyand M, Greshake B, et al. Left ventricular assist device infection is associated with increased mortality but is not a contraindication to transplantation. Circulation 1997; 95:814.
  18. Deng MC, Erren M, Tjan TD, et al. Left ventricular assist system support is associated with persistent inflammation and temporary immunosuppression. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 47 Suppl 2:326.
  19. Reilly MP, Wiegers SE, Cucchiara AJ, et al. Frequency, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of left ventricular assist device-associated ventricular thrombus. Am J Cardiol 2000; 86:1156.