Background　and　objective:　A　gap　still　exists　in　the　hemodynamic　effect　of　intra-aortic　balloon　pump　(IABP),　venoarterial　extracorporeal　membrane　oxygenation　(VA-ECMO),　and　VA-ECMO　plus　IABP　on　the　blood　perfusion　of　the　coronary　artery,　brain,　and　lower　limb;　the　relation　between　heart　flow　and　ECMO　flow;　and　the　wall　stress　of　vessels.　Methods:　A　finite-element　model　of　the　aorta,　ECMO,　and　IABP　was　proposed　to　calculate　the　mechanical　response　via　fluid-structure　interaction.　Heart　failure　(HF),　IABP,　ECMO,　and　ECMO　plus　IABP　were　utilized　to　study　the　effect　of　support　models.　Results:　For　the　pressure　curve,　VA-ECMO　weakened　the　dicrotic　notch　of　pressure　compared　with　HF　and　the　pulsatile　index　(0.494　vs.　0.706　vs.　0.471　vs.　0.613).　IABP,　ECMO,　and　ECMO　plus　IABP　increased　the　perfusion　of　the　coronary,　brain,　and　renal　artery　compared　with　HF.　However,　ECMO　and　ECMO　plus　IABP　clearly　reduced　the　blood　flow　of　the　left　arteria　femoralis　compared　to　that　of　the　right　arteria　femoralis　(ECMO:　194.04　vs.　730.80　mL/min;　ECMO　plus　IABP:　342.15　vs.　947.22　mL/min).　In　addition,　the　flow　of　ECMO　accessed　the　renal　artery　more　than　the　left　ventricular　flow.　Greater　ventricular　flow　perfused　to　the　renal　artery　at　a　diastolic　period　for　ECMO　plus　IABP,　especially　at　the　time　points　of　2.192　s　and　2.304　s.　Compared　to　the　velocity　distribution　with　ECMO,　the　flow　of　the　right　arteria　femoralis　was　increased　in　the　process　of　IABP-on.　According　to　these　four　cases,　the　stress　of　the　vascular　wall　was　increased　for　ECMO　support　at　the　systolic　period.　The　peak　wall　stress　of　ECMO　is　increased　by　20%　at　1.68　s.　Conclusions:　ECMO　plus　IABP　is　more　conducive　to　the　blood　supply　than　other　cases　from　the　result　of　numerical　simulation.　The　location　of　blood　intersection　was　generated　in　the　region　of　the　renal　artery,　which　is　estimated　carefully.　(C)　2019　Elsevier　B.V.　All　rights　reserved.