Pulsatile vs. continuous flow in ventricular assist device therapy

Gabriel Loor, Gonzalo Gonzalez-Stawinski

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

33 Scopus citations


A left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is an important treatment option for a patient with end-stage heart failure. Both continuous and non-pulsatile devices are available, each with different effects on a patient's physiology. In general, these effects are not clinically significant with the exception of bleeding events which are more common with continuous-flow devices in some series. Both devices increase survival beyond medical management. Continuous-flow devices are smaller and are associated with less overall morbidity than pulsatile devices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)105-115
Number of pages11
JournalBest Practice and Research: Clinical Anaesthesiology
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jun 2012


  • continuous flow
  • heart failure
  • left ventricular assist device
  • pulsatile flow
  • transplantation


Dive into the research topics of 'Pulsatile vs. continuous flow in ventricular assist device therapy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this