REVIEW article
Front. Cardiovasc. Med.
Sec. Heart Failure and Transplantation
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2025.1569188
This article is part of the Research TopicCardiac Replacement Therapy: Transplantation, VADs, and Artificial HeartsView all articles
Mechanical Circulatory Support as a Cornerstone in Advanced Heart Failure and Transplantation
Provisionally accepted
- 1Centro Hospitalar Universitário de São João (CHUSJ), Porto, Portugal
- 2Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, United States
- 3Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Balearic Islands, Spain
- 4Institut d'Investigacio Biomedica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Orthotopic heart transplantation remains the gold standard for managing selected patients with endstage heart failure (HF) who are unresponsive to conventional therapies. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS), encompassing durable (dMCS) and temporary (tMCS) devices, has become a cornerstone in bridging patients to transplant (BTT) and also addressing the increasing burden of advanced HF with dMCS destination therapy. Each type of MCS offers distinct advantages tailored to specific patient needs and clinical scenarios. This review summarizes the features of MCS devices, their implications in clinical practice, and their impact on patient outcomes. Evidence demonstrates that dMCS, including the widely used durable left ventricular assist device HeartMate 3, significantly improves the prognosis of waitlisted patients and is associated with better post-transplant outcomes compared to tMCS when used as a BTT strategy. However, recent trends in allocation systems favor prioritizing tMCS-supported patients to improve outcomes for sicker individuals, underscoring the complexity of resource allocation. In this context, recent tMCs devices such as the Impella 5.5 have demonstrated promising early results as BTT, and ongoing larger studies with long-term follow-up will be crucial to better define their optimal indications and patient selection. Additional research is required to ascertain whether urgency-based models provide the most equitable distribution of resources while optimizing both pre-and post-transplant outcomes. Continued innovation in MCS technology, alongside the development of personalized treatment strategies, is vital to address the evolving needs of the growing advanced HF population. Future advancements should prioritize creating devices that are easier to implant, feature wireless power sources, and provide more physiological support, ultimately enhancing the care and outcomes of patients with advanced HF.
Keywords: temporary mechanical circulatory support, Durable mechanical circulatory support, Advanced heart failure, Transplantation, bridge to transplant
Received: 31 Jan 2025; Accepted: 11 Sep 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Braga, Pinho, Jorde and González-Costello. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: José González-Costello, jgcostello@hotmail.com
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.