Mechanical Circulatory Support in Women

Central Illustration: [Display omitted] •The incidence of cardiogenic shock has been increasing.•Women with cardiogenic shock have a worse risk profile compared to men.•There is paucity of data on gender differences and outcomes in patients with mechanical circulatory support. A number of devices can now provide mechanical circulatory support (MCS) to patients with acute cardiogenic shock (CS) and chronic end-stage heart failure (HF). Women differ from men in pathophysiology and natural history of CS and HF, and are usually sicker at admission. Current evidence suggests that women benefit as much as men, if not more, from both temporary and durable MCS for appropriate indications. Yet, women have been under-represented in clinical trials of MCS devices. Limited evidence suggests that women benefit more from temporary MCS in CS associated with acute myocardial infarction. However, in patients with durable left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), women are more likely to experience thromboembolic events and right HF. This review aims to study available evidence and determine areas for further research on gender differences in (a) use of temporary MCS for CS and (b) use of durable LVADs. Use of MCS in conditions specific to, or more common in women (pregnancy, takotsubo cardiomyopathy, peripartum cardiomyopathy, and spontaneous coronary artery dissection) is also discussed.