Paolo Manca, Vincenzo Nuzzi, Antonella Peccianti, Lisa Prahl Wittberg, Maximilian Valentin Malfertheiner, Lars Mikael Broman, Mirko Belliato, Johannes Heinze, Lorenzo Grazioli, Matthias Raes, Matteo Di Nardo, Dirk W Donker, Leen Vercaemst, Jutta Arens, Calogera Pisano, Giuseppe Maria Raffa, Manlio Cipriani, Roberto Lorusso
{"title":"Acute Right Ventricular Failure in Animal Models: Evidence, Limitations, and Future Directions.","authors":"Paolo Manca, Vincenzo Nuzzi, Antonella Peccianti, Lisa Prahl Wittberg, Maximilian Valentin Malfertheiner, Lars Mikael Broman, Mirko Belliato, Johannes Heinze, Lorenzo Grazioli, Matthias Raes, Matteo Di Nardo, Dirk W Donker, Leen Vercaemst, Jutta Arens, Calogera Pisano, Giuseppe Maria Raffa, Manlio Cipriani, Roberto Lorusso","doi":"10.1111/aor.70212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Acute right ventricular failure (ARVF) is a life-threatening condition commonly encountered in the intensive care unit. The treatment of ARVF profoundly changed in the last years, with a growing number of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices that have been deployed in clinical practice to support patients with severe forms of ARVF. However, comparative clinical data addressing the superiority of the different MCS strategies are lacking. Several animal models addressing ARVF have been proposed in the literature, and they have been crucial to increase the knowledge on right ventricular (RV) pathophysiology and response to different stressors. Nevertheless, models that reliably mimic acute RV severe failure, ventricular-pulmonary artery uncoupling, and cardiogenic shock are comparatively scarce. Furthermore, only a limited number of experimental studies have incorporated MCS devices in this setting, and direct head-to-head comparisons between different support strategies are largely lacking. This gap in preclinical experiences significantly limits the development of evidence-based algorithms for right-sided MCS deployment. In this review, we summarize currently available animal models of ARVF, critically highlighting their methodological strengths and limitations, and examining the evidence supporting the use of MCS within these frameworks. By highlighting the translational limitations of the existing preclinical experiences, we underscore the urgent need for standardized, reproducible, and clinically relevant ARVF models. Such efforts are essential to improve the current treatment of ARVF, and they could be particularly relevant in developing and optimizing MCS devices and their selection, ultimately enhancing outcomes in patients with ARVF.</p>","PeriodicalId":8450,"journal":{"name":"Artificial organs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artificial organs","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aor.70212","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Acute right ventricular failure (ARVF) is a life-threatening condition commonly encountered in the intensive care unit. The treatment of ARVF profoundly changed in the last years, with a growing number of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices that have been deployed in clinical practice to support patients with severe forms of ARVF. However, comparative clinical data addressing the superiority of the different MCS strategies are lacking. Several animal models addressing ARVF have been proposed in the literature, and they have been crucial to increase the knowledge on right ventricular (RV) pathophysiology and response to different stressors. Nevertheless, models that reliably mimic acute RV severe failure, ventricular-pulmonary artery uncoupling, and cardiogenic shock are comparatively scarce. Furthermore, only a limited number of experimental studies have incorporated MCS devices in this setting, and direct head-to-head comparisons between different support strategies are largely lacking. This gap in preclinical experiences significantly limits the development of evidence-based algorithms for right-sided MCS deployment. In this review, we summarize currently available animal models of ARVF, critically highlighting their methodological strengths and limitations, and examining the evidence supporting the use of MCS within these frameworks. By highlighting the translational limitations of the existing preclinical experiences, we underscore the urgent need for standardized, reproducible, and clinically relevant ARVF models. Such efforts are essential to improve the current treatment of ARVF, and they could be particularly relevant in developing and optimizing MCS devices and their selection, ultimately enhancing outcomes in patients with ARVF.
期刊介绍:
Artificial Organs is the official peer reviewed journal of The International Federation for Artificial Organs (Members of the Federation are: The American Society for Artificial Internal Organs, The European Society for Artificial Organs, and The Japanese Society for Artificial Organs), The International Faculty for Artificial Organs, the International Society for Rotary Blood Pumps, The International Society for Pediatric Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Support, and the Vienna International Workshop on Functional Electrical Stimulation. Artificial Organs publishes original research articles dealing with developments in artificial organs applications and treatment modalities and their clinical applications worldwide. Membership in the Societies listed above is not a prerequisite for publication. Articles are published without charge to the author except for color figures and excess page charges as noted.