Right ventricular (RV) failure remains a major cause of global morbidity and mortality for patients with advanced heart failure, pulmonary hypertension, or acute myocardial infarction and after major cardiac surgery. Over the past 2 decades, percutaneously delivered acute mechanical circulatory support pumps specifically designed to support RV failure have been introduced into clinical practice. RV acute mechanical circulatory support now represents an important step in the management of RV failure and provides an opportunity to rapidly stabilize patients with cardiogenic shock involving the RV. As experience with RV devices grows, their role as mechanical therapies for RV failure will depend less on the technical ability to place the device and more on improved algorithms for identifying RV failure, patient monitoring, and weaning protocols for both isolated RV failure and biventricular failure. In this review, we discuss the pathophysiology of acute RV failure and both the mechanism of action and clinical data exploring the utility of existing RV acute mechanical circulatory support devices.

BackgroundThe subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S‐ICD) has been developed to avert risks associated with transvenous defibrillator leads. The technology is attractive for younger patients, such as those with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). However, there are limited data on S‐ICD use in HCM.Methods and Results HCM patients identified at risk for sudden death were considered for S‐ICD implantation. Patients were screened for potential oversensing by surface electrocardiography (ECG). At implant, defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing was performed at 65, 50, and 35 joules (J). Twenty‐seven patients were considered for S‐ICD implantation, and after screening, 23 (85%) remained eligible. The presence of a bundle branch block was associated with screening failure, whereas elevated body mass index (BMI) showed a trend toward association. One patient passed screening at rest, but failed with an ECG obtained after exercise. At implant, the S‐ICD terminated ventricular fibrillation (VF) with a 65J shock in all 15 implanted patients and a 50J shock was successful in 12 of 15. A 35J shock terminated VF in 10 of 12 patients. DFT failure at 50 J was associated with a higher BMI. There were no appropriate shocks after a median follow‐up of 17.5 (3–35) months, and 1 patient received an inappropriate shock attributable to a temporary reduction in QRS amplitude while bending forward, resulting in oversensing, despite successful screening.ConclusionsIn a high‐risk HCM cohort without a pacing indication referred for consideration of an ICD, the majority were eligible for S‐ICD. The S‐ICD is effective at recognizing and terminating VF at implant with a wide safety margin.

No abstract