Skip to main content
. 2020 Mar 16;6:e01. doi: 10.15420/cfr.2019.02

Table 2: Comparison of Devices.

IABP iVAC Impella 2.5 Impella 5 Impella RP VA ECMO TandemHeart
Bedside implantation Yes No No No No Yes No
Pump mechanism Pneumatic Pneumatic Axial Axial Axial Centrifugal Centrifugal
Cannula size 7–8 Fr 17 Fr Catheter: 9 Fr
Pump motor: 12 Fr
Catheter: 9 Fr
Pump motor: 21 Fr
Catheter: 11 Fr
Pump motor: 22 Fr
18–21 Fr inflow
15–22 Fr outflow
21 Fr inflow

15 Fr outflow
Flow (l/min) 0.5–1.0 2 2.5 5 >4 > 4.5 5
Insertion technique Percutaneous Percutaneous Percutaneous Surgical Percutaneous Percutaneous Surgical Percutaneous
Implantation time + + ++ +++ ++ +++ +++
Gas exchanger - - - - - ++++ -
Metabolic support - - - - - ++++ -
Left ventricular support + + ++ +++ - - ++++
Right ventricular support - - - - +++ ++++ -
Biventricular support - - - - + - -
Circulatory support + + ++ +++ - ++++ ++
Anticoagulation + + ++ ++ ++ +++ +++
Haemolysis + + ++ +++ ++ ++ ++
Post-implantation management difficulty + + ++ ++ ++ +++ ++++
Level of evidence (European guidelines) IIIb N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

IABP = intra-aortic balloon pump; N/A = not available; VA ECMO = venous-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; +,++,+++,++++ = relative qualitative grading concerning: time (implantation time); intensity (anticoagulation, post-implantation management difficulty, gas exchanger, metabolic support, left ventricular support, right ventricular support, biventricular support and circulatory support); and severity (haemolysis).