Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 5, 2026

Use of a Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device/Left Atrium to Femoral Artery Bypass System for Cardiogenic Shock
Published on: August 16, 2021
Further Peripheral Vascular Dysfunction in Heart Failure Patients With a Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist
Melissa A H Witman1, Ryan S Garten1, Jayson R Gifford2
1Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, George E. Whalen VA Medical Center, Salt Lake City, Utah; Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatrics, George E. Whalen VA Medical Center and University of Utah Medical Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Objectives:
Using flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD) and reactive hyperemia (RH), this study aimed to provide greater insight into left ventricular assist device (LVAD)-induced changes in peripheral vascular function.
Background:
Peripheral endothelial function is recognized to be impaired in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but the peripheral vascular effects of continuous-flow LVAD implantation, now used as either a bridge to transplantation or as a destination therapy, remain unclear.
Methods:
Sixty-eight subjects (13 New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class II HFrEF patients, 19 NYHA functional class III/IV HFrEF patients, 20 NYHA functional class III/IV HFrEF patients post-LVAD implantation, and 16 healthy age-matched control subjects) underwent FMD and RH testing in the brachial artery with blood flow velocity, artery diameters, and pulsatility index (PI) assessed by ultrasound Doppler.
Results:
PI was significantly lower in the LVAD group (2.0 ± 0.4) compared with both the HFrEF II (8.6 ± 0.8) and HFrEF III/IV (8.1 ± 0.9) patients, who, in turn, had significantly lower PI than the control subjects (12.8 ± 0.9). Likewise, LVAD %FMD/shear rate (0.09 ± 0.01 %Δ/s(-1)) was significantly reduced compared with all other groups (control subjects, 0.24 ± 0.03; HFrEF II, 0.17 ± 0.02; and HFrEF III/IV, 0.13 ± 0.02 %Δ/s(-1)), and %FMD/shear rate significantly correlated with PI (r = 0.45). RH was unremarkable across groups.
Conclusions:
Although central hemodynamics are improved in patients with HFrEF by a continuous-flow LVAD, peripheral vascular function is further compromised, which is likely due, at least in part, to the reduction in pulsatility that is a characteristic of such a mechanical assist device.
More Related Videos
03:40Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Peripheral Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Without Left Ventricular Venting
Published on: January 17, 2025
06:10Utilizing Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock
Published on: June 12, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Imbalances in Cardiac Output
CHF can occur due to the failure of either side of the heart. Left-side failure leads to pulmonary congestion—the right side continues to send...
Heart Failure II: Pathophysiology
Heart Failure III: Clinical Manifestations
Pathophysiology of Heart Failure
Heart Failure VI: Adjunct Therapies
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy