Mechanical circulatory devices, such as ventricular assist devices (VADs), have become the life-saving alternative for the patients who suffered from severe heart failure (1). These devices were utilized as the bridge-transplant devices; however, due to the fast growing population of cardiovascular diseases and the eligible organ donations are very limited, these devices have been considered for the application of life-long implantation. The continuous-flow VADs offer better hemodynamic performance than the first generations pulsatile flow VADs, its compact design offers surgical advantage; however, due to the non-physiological blood flow past constricted geometrics where platelets are exposed to elevated wall shear stress (2), VADs are burdened with high incidence of thromboembolic events, mandating anticoagulation therapies for its recipients (3).
- Bioengineering Division
Thrombogenicity Comparison of Axial Ventricular Assist Devices by DTE Methodology: MicroMed HeartAssist 5 and Thoratec Heartmate II
- Views Icon Views
- Share Icon Share
- Search Site
Chiu, W, Xenos, M, Alemu, Y, Girdhar, G, Lynch, B, Jesty, J, Slepian, M, Einav, S, & Bluestein, D. "Thrombogenicity Comparison of Axial Ventricular Assist Devices by DTE Methodology: MicroMed HeartAssist 5 and Thoratec Heartmate II." Proceedings of the ASME 2012 Summer Bioengineering Conference. ASME 2012 Summer Bioengineering Conference, Parts A and B. Fajardo, Puerto Rico, USA. June 20–23, 2012. pp. 63-64. ASME. https://doi.org/10.1115/SBC2012-80190
Download citation file: