You are visiting a website that is not intended for your region

The page or information you have requested is intended for an audience outside the United States. By continuing to browse you confirm that you are a non-US resident requesting access to this page or information.

Switch to the US site

COVID-19 Resource Center

Healthcare professionals can find help and guidance on how to benefit from our offerings to treat your patients, as well as other practical information and advice.

Read more

Getinge Counterpulsation

Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsation

First line support for your high risk patients
Getinge cath lab

Device Options in the Cath Lab - Practical Patient Support

Speaker: Joseph L. Thomas, MD, FSCAI

Assistant Health Science Clinical Professor David Geffen School of Medicine
Director, Interventional Cardiology Harbor-UCLA Medical Center

The use of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has been rapidly evolving as devices become smaller, more efficient, easier to deploy, and less invasive. The purpose of this session is to share an expert's experience on the use of counterpulsation therapy in the treatment of patients at high risk for cardiovascular compromise during percutaneous coronary intervention considering current evidence, risk of complication, and cost.

On Demand Webinar with Dr. Thomas

The benefits of pre-operative IABP counterpulsation for high risk CABG patients

In this webinar, Dr. Joseph L. Thomas presents his expert opinion, the physiologic basis for pre-operative IABP counterpulsation and the existing clinical data in support of this treatment strategy.

What everyone should know about the clinical and economic effectiveness of pVADS

Hospital systems could avoid incremental costs of up to $2.5 billion annually by using IABP as an initial therapy in high-risk PCI and cardiogenic shock patients.

IABP should be implemented as a first-line strategy for cardiogenic shock and high risk PCI.

Read more about pVADS

Hemodynamic effects of standard vs. larger-capacity intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation pumps

The first reported patient comparison on 40cc vs. 50cc supports our bench test results - 50cc IAB may yield better clinical outcomes than standard 40cc IAB. The 50cc IAB provides:

  • Greater diastolic augmentation and provides greater systolic unloading
  • Significant decrease in cardiac filling pressures and increase of cardiac output

Read more about hemodynamic effects

The why, when and who of mechanical circulatory support

The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) has long been the first-line choice for mechanical circulatory support due to its clinical efficacy, safety profile across a broad range of patient care scenarios, and low cost.

Recent debate regarding the IABP has centered on the discrepant results obtained from randomized, controlled trials (RCTs), versus the benefits observed by clinicians in decades of clinical practice.

This series of educational programs reviews the physiological principles behind current circulatory support therapies.

Learn about the why, when and who

The critical science: Understanding the ABCs of mechanical circulatory support

A review of the physiological principles behind mechanical circulatory support, ranging from inotropes and IABP therapy to (pVADs) and extracorporeal pumps.

The clinical enigma: Randomized trials vs. clinical practice

This discussion addresses points relative to the dichotomy between trial results and clinical practice.

Real world application of mechanical circulatory support

In this discussion, case examples demonstrate how to determine patient selection for mechanical circulatory support.

Slides presented by the Champions of the Cath Lab

This three-module series educational program provides
  • A review of the physiological principles behind mechanical circulatory support; ranging from inotropes and IABP therapy to percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (pVADs) and extracorporeal pumps
  • Discussion points relative to the dichotomy between trial results and clinical practice
  • Discussion utilizing case examples that demonstrate how to determine patient selection for mechanical circulatory support