Adverse events in contemporary continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices: A multi-institutional comparison shows significant differences

John M. Stulak, Mary E. Davis, Nicholas Haglund, Shannon M Dunlay, Jennifer Cowger, Palak Shah, Francis D. Pagani, Keith D. Aaronson, Simon Maltais

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

57 Scopus citations


Objectives We review differences in the incidence and timing of adverse events in patients implanted with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), using the Mechanical Circulatory Support Research Network registry. Methods From May 2004 to September 2014, a total of 734 patients (591 men; median age: 59 years) underwent primary continuous-flow LVAD implantation at our institutions. Patients implanted with the HeartMate II (HMII) (560 [76%] patients), compared with the HeartWare ventricular assist device (HVAD; 174 [24%]) were more often receiving destination therapy (47% vs 20%; P

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)177-189
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1 2016



  • heart failure
  • mechanical circulatory support
  • ventricular assist device

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this