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.