Contemporary Overview of Current Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices for Advanced Heart Failure: A Narrative Review
Keywords:
Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory System, Temporary Mechanical Circulatory System, Ventricular Assist Devices, Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices, Impella.Abstract
Mechanical circulatory support devices have become essential in the management of acute hemodynamic compromise, provid-ing rapid, minimally invasive augmentation of cardiac output in heart failure, cardiogenic shock, high-risk percutaneous coro-nary intervention, post-cardiotomy ventricular dysfunction, and refractory cardiac arrest. Unlike conventional ventricular assist systems, percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices are designed for swift deployment through peripheral vascular access and are intended for short-term support. Advancements over recent decades have substantially broadened the range of these devices. They vary widely in mechanism of action, flow capability, insertion technique, and hemodynamic targets, al-lowing tailored support for left-, right-, or biventricular failure. Parallel to technological innovation, evidence from major trials and international registries has refined contemporary practice by characterizing hemodynamic benefits, procedural outcomes, and device-specific limitations. This review synthesizes contemporary knowledge on pMCS systems, their designs, physiological effects, clinical indications, and limitations.
References
1. Abnousi F, Yong CM, Fearon W, Banerjee D. The evolution of temporary per-cutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices: a review of the options and evidence in cardiogenic shock. Curr Cardiol Rep 2015; 17: 40.
2. Rihal CS, Naidu SS, Givertz MM, Szeto WY, Burke JA, Kapur NK, Kern M, Gar-ratt KN, Goldstein JA, Dimas V, Tu T; Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI); Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA); Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS); American Heart Association (AHA), and Ameri-can College of Cardiology (ACC). 2015 SCAI/ACC/HFSA/STS Clinical expert consensus statement on the use of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices in cardiovascular care: endorsed by the American Heart As-sociation, the Cardiological Society of India, and Sociedad Latino Americana de Cardiologia Intervencion; affirma tion of value by the Canadian Asso-ciation of Interventional Cardiology-Association Canadienne de Cardiologie d’intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015; 65: e7-e26.
3. Kar B, Gregoric ID, Basra SS, Idelchik GM, Loyalka P. The percutaneous ven-tricular assist device in severe refractory cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 57: 688-696.
4. Meyns B, Dens J, Sergeant P, Herijgers P, Daenen W, Flameng W. Initial expe-riences with the Impella device in patients with cardio genic shock-Impella support for cardiogenic shock. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003; 51: 312-317.
5. Burzotta F, Russo G, Previ L, Bruno P, Aurigemma C, Trani C. Impella: pumps overview and access site management. Minerva Cardioangiol 2018; 66: 606-611.
6. Cheng, A, Swartz MF, Massey HT. Impella to unload the left ventricle during peripheral extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. ASAIO J 2013; 59: 533-536.
7. Frisoli TM, Guerrero M, O’Neill WW. Mechanical circulatory support with Im-pella to facilitate percutaneous coronary intervention for post-TAVI bilateral coronary obstruction. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2016; 88: E34-E37.
8. Raess DH, Weber DM. Impella 2.5. J Cardiovasc Trans Res 2009; 2: 168-172.
9. Panagides V, Vase H, Shah SP, Basir MB, Mancini J, Kamran H, Batra S, Laine M, Eiskjćr H, Christensen S, Karami M, Paganelli F, Henriques JPS, Bonello L.
10. Impella CP implantation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation for cardiac ar-rest: a multicenter experience. J Clin Med 2021; 10: 339.
11. Ziemba EA, John R. Mechanical circulatory support for bridge to decision: which device and when to decide. J Card Surg 2010; 25: 425-433.
12. Gaudard P, Mourad M, Eliet J, Zeroual N, Culas G, Rouviere P, Albat B, Colson P. Management and outcome of patients supported with Impella 5.0 for refrac-tory cardiogenic shock. Crit Care 2015; 19: 363.
13. Valdes CA, Bilgili A, Reddy A, Sharaf O, Jimenez-Contreras F, Stinson G, Ahmed M, Vilaro J, Parker AM, Az Al-Ani M, Demos D, Aranda J, Bleiweis M, Beaver TM, Jeng EI. Impella 5.5: a systematic review of the current litera-ture. Innovations 2024; 19: 380-389.
14. Sultan I, Kilic A, Kilic A. Short-term circulatory and right ventricle support in cardiogenic shock: extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, Tandem Heart, CentriMag, and Impella. Heart Fail Clin 2018; 14: 579-583.
15. Anderson MB, Goldstein J, Milano C, Morris LD, Kormos RL, Bhama J, Kapur NK, Bansal A, Garcia J, Baker JN, Silvestry S, Holman WL, Douglas PS, O’Neill W. Benefits of a novel percutaneous ventricular assist device for right heart fail-ure: the prospective RECOVER RIGHT Study of the Impella RP Device. J Heart Lung Transplant 2015; 34: 1549-1560.
16. Aragon J, Lee MS, Kar S, Makkar RR. Percutaneous left ventricular assist de-vice: “TandemHeart” for high-risk coronary intervention. Catheter Cardio-vasc Interv 2005; 65: 346-352.
17. Mandawat A, Rao SV. Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices in cardiogenic shock. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2017; 10: e004337.
18. Burkhoff D, Cohen H, Brunckhorst C. A randomized multicenter clinical study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TandenHeart percutaneous ventric-ular assist device versus conventional therapy with intraaortic baloon pump-ing for treatment of cardiogenic shock. Am Heart J 2006; 152: 469.1-469.e8.
19. Ravichandran AK, Baran DA, Stelling K, Cowger JA, Salerno CT. Outcomes with the Tandem Protek duo dual-lumen percutaneous right ventricular as-sist device. ASAIO J 2018; 64: 570-572.
20. John KJ, Nabzdyk CGS, Chweich H, Mishra AK, Lal A. ProtekDuo percutaneous ventricular support system-physiology and clinical applications. Ann Transl Med 2024; 12: 14.
21. Brewer JM, Maybauer MO. The ProtekDuo cannula: a comprehensive review of efficacy and clinical applications in right ventricular failure. J Clin Med 2024; 13: 4077.
22. Van Mieghem NM, Daemen J, den Uil C, Dur O, Joziasse L, Maugenest AM, Fitzgerald K, Parker C, Muller P, van Geuns RJ. Design and principle of the Heart-Mate PHP (percutaneous heart pump). Euro Interv 2018; 13: 1662-1666.
23. Introducing heartmate phpTM 2023 https://sante.ro/wp-content/up-loads/2016/04/PHP-Brochure_English_ 2015. pdf Accessed 5 July 2023. Puzzle Medical Devices Inc. 2023 https://www. puzzlemed.com/ Accessed 5 July 2023.
24. Georges G, Trudeau F, Doucet-Martineau J, Rochon M, Potvin J, Ebner A, Gé-néreux P. First-in-human experience with the ModulHeart device for mechan-ical circulatory support and renal perfusion. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiography Interv 2022; 1: 100449.
25. Yamazaki K, Okamoto E, Yamamoto K, Mitamura Y, Tanaka T, Yozu R. The val-vopump, an axial blood pump implanted at the heart valve position: concept and initial results. Artif Org 1992; 16: 297-299.
26. Keeble T, Smith E, Ferrari M, Hullin R, Fredrik S, Reitan O, Rothman M. TCT-378 Interim analysis of the Reitan Catheter Pump (RCP) heart failure efficacy study: RCP improves cardiovascular and renal function in acute decompen-sated heart failure (ADHF). JACC 2012; 60 (17 Suppl): B108.
27. Retain O, Öhlin H, Peterzén B, Granfeldt H, Steen S, Emanuelsson H. Initial tests with a new cardiac assist device. ASAIO J 1999; 45: 317-321.
28. Retain O, Steen S, Öhlin H. Hemodynamic effects of a new percutaneous circulatory support device in a left ventricular failure model. ASAIO J 2003; 49: 731-736.
29. Miller LW, Ebner A, Leonhardt H, Richardson MJ. First in human experience with the second heart assist device. ASAIO J 2020; 66: 29.
30. Second heart assist HP 2023 https://secondheartinc.com/ Accessed 5 July 2023.
31. Annamalai SK, Esposito ML, Reyelt LA, Natov P, Jorde LE, Karas RH, Kapur NK. Abdominal positioning of the next generation intra-aortic fluid entrainment pump(Aortix) improves cardiac output in a swine model of heart failure. Circ Heart Fail 2018; 11: e005115.
32. Shabari FR, George J, Cuchiara MP, Langsner RJ, Heuring JJ, Cohn WE, Hert-zog BA, Delgado R. Improved hemodynamics with a novel miniaturized intra-aortic axial flow pump in a pocine model of acute left ventricular dysfunc-tion. ASAIO J 2013; 59: 240-245.
33. Wang R, Pei Z, Shen L, Song S, Ge J. TCT-580 CFD-based performance predic-tion and comprehensive evaluation of a newly development percutaneous ventricular assist device. J Am Coll Cardiol 2024; 84 (18 Suppl): B213.
34. Toda K, Loforte A, Tchantchaleishvili V. Report on the 30th Annual Meeting of the International Society for Mechanical Circulatory Support (ISMCS). Artif Organs 2025; 2025: 1-11.
35. Henriques JP, Remmelink M, Baan J, van der Schaaf RJ, Vis MM, Koch KT, Scholten EW, de Mol BA, Tijssen JG, Piek JJ, de Winter RJ. Safety and feasibility of elective high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention procedures with left ventricular support of the Impella Recover LP 2.5. Am J Cardiol 2006; 97: 990-992.
36. Sjauw KD, Remmelink M, Baan J, Lam K, Engstrom AE, van der Schaaf RJ, Vis MM, Koch KT, van Straalen JP, Tijssen JG, de Mol BA, de Winter RJ, Piek JJ, Henriques JP. Left ventricular unloading in acute ST-segment elevation myo-cardial infarction patients is safe and feasible and provides acute and sus-tained left ventricular recovery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 51: 1044-1046.
37. Seyfarth M, Sibbing D, Bauer I, Frohlich G, Bott-Flugel L, Byrne R, Dirschin-ger J, Kastrati A, Schomig A. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device versus intra-aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myo-cardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 52: 1584-1588.
38. Sjauw KD, Konorza T, Erbel R, Danna PL, Viecca M, Minden HH, Butter C, Eng-strom T, Hassager C, Machado FP, Peddrazini G, Wagner DR, Schamberger R, Kerber S, Mathey DG, Schofer J, Engstrom AE, Henriques JP. Supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with the Impella 2.5 device: the Eu-ropella registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54: 2430-2434.
39. Maini B, Naidu SS, Mulukutla S, Kleiman N, Schreiber T, Wohns D, Dixon S, Rihal C, Dave R, O’Neill W. Real-world use of the Impella 2.5 circulatory support system in complex high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: the USpella Registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2012; 80: 717-725.
40. Dixon SR, Henriques JP, Mauri L, Sjauw K, Civitello A, Kar B, Loyalka P, Resnic FS, Teirstein P, Makkar R, Palacios IF, Collins M, Moses J, Benali K, O’Neill WW. A prospective feasibility trial investigating the use of the Impella 2.5 sys-tem in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (the PROTECT 1 Trial): initial US experience. J Am Coll Cardiol Cardiovasc In-terv 2009; 2: 91-96.
41. PROTECT II: a prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled trial of the Im-pella Recover LP 2.5 system versus intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in pa-tients undergoing non emergent high risk PCI. Abiomed Inc.
42. O’Neill WW, Kleiman NS, Moses J, Henriques JPS, Dixon S, Massaro J, Pala-cios I, Maini B, Mulukutla S, Dzavík V, Popma J, Douglas PS, Ohman M. A pro-spective, 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: 1717-1727.
43. Anderson MB, Goldstein J, Milano C, Morris LD, Kormos RL, Bhama J, Ka-pur NK, Bansal A, Garcia J, Baker JN, Silvestry S, Holman WL, Douglas PS, O’Neill W. Benefits of a novel percutaneous ventricular assist device for right heart failure: the prospective RECOVER RIGHT study of the Impella RP device. J Heart Lung Transplant 2015; 34: 1549-1560.
44. Ouweneel DM, Eriksen E, Sjauw KD, van Dongen IM. Impella CP versus intra-aortic balloon pump in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardio-genic shock: the IMPRESS trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 69: 278-287.
45. ClinicalTrials.gov: SAVE-PCI: NyokAssist™ Small-Bore VAD vs. IABP in Elec-tive High-Risk PCI. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07010965#more-information (last accessed on December 01,2025).
46. Wang R. SAVE-PCI: NyokAssist VAD vs. IABP in Elective High-Risk PCI Small-Bore: Late-breaking Clinical Science, TCT Conference 2025, San Francisco.
