IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i16p3606-d1221365.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Computational Evaluation of IABP, Impella 2.5, TandemHeart and Combined IABP and Impella 2.5 Support in Cardiogenic Shock

Author

Listed:
  • Rahmi Alkan

    (School of Engineering, Ulster University—Belfast, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, York Street, Belfast BT15 1AP, UK)

  • Beatrice De Lazzari

    (Human Movement and Sport Sciences, “Foro Italico” University of Rome, 00147 Rome, Italy)

  • Massimo Capoccia

    (Northern General Hospital, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield S5 7AU, UK
    Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G4 0NW, UK)

  • Claudio De Lazzari

    (National Research Council, Institute of Clinical Physiology (IFC-CNR), 00185 Rome, Italy
    Faculty of Medicine, Teaching University Geomedi, 0114 Tbilisi, Georgia)

  • Selim Bozkurt

    (School of Engineering, Ulster University—Belfast, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, York Street, Belfast BT15 1AP, UK)

Abstract

Cardiogenic shock is a life-threatening condition consisting of low cardiac output status leading to end-organ hypoperfusion following either acute left or right ventricular failure or decompensation of chronic heart failure. Partial or failed response to inotropic support in the acute phase may require the use of mechanical circulatory support. Although patients supported with different devices such as an IABP, Impella 2.5, or TandemHeart experience stability in the short term, the haemodynamic benefits of each device remain unclear. The aim of this study is to present a direct comparison of an IABP, Impella 2.5, TandemHeart, and combined IABP and Impella 2.5 support in cardiogenic shock to evaluate haemodynamic variables and left ventricular unloading using cardiovascular system modelling and simulation in terms of cardiac function, systemic, pulmonary, cardiac, and cerebral circulations. The simulation results showed that the IABP had a relatively low effect on the haemodynamic variables. Although both Impella 2.5 and TandemHeart improved the total blood flow rates, as well as coronary and cerebral perfusion with the increasing pump operating speed, TandemHeart had a more profound effect on the haemodynamic variables. Combining the IABP and Impella 2.5 also improved the haemodynamics, although at the expense of reverse blood flow in the cerebral circulation. Simulation results showed that TandemHeart support might have a more beneficial effect on the haemodynamics and left ventricular energetics in comparison to the IABP and Impella 2.5. Nevertheless, the combined use of the IABP and Impella 2.5 for short-term support may be considered an appropriate alternative.

Suggested Citation

  • Rahmi Alkan & Beatrice De Lazzari & Massimo Capoccia & Claudio De Lazzari & Selim Bozkurt, 2023. "Computational Evaluation of IABP, Impella 2.5, TandemHeart and Combined IABP and Impella 2.5 Support in Cardiogenic Shock," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-17, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:16:p:3606-:d:1221365
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/16/3606/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/16/3606/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:16:p:3606-:d:1221365. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.