ReviewHeart failure reviews2012
Mechanical circulatory support for elderly heart failure patients.
Review in Heart failure reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- In-hospital mortality in older patients after ventricular assist device implantation: A national cohort study.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2019Article
- Can a Left Ventricular Assist Device in Individuals with Advanced Systolic Heart Failure Improve or Reverse Frailty?Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2017Article
- Heart failure management in the elderly - a public health challenge.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2016Review
- Ventricular assist device implantation in the elderly.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2014Article
- Heart failure in elderly patients: distinctive features and unresolved issues.European journal of heart failure · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
End-stage systolic heart failure is an increasingly common problem in elderly patients and is associated with high cost, poor quality of life, and poor outcomes. Mechanical circulatory support is a promising therapy as both a bridge to transplantation and destination therapy. Elderly patients are frequently ineligible for heart transplantation because of their age and comorbidities, and the application of mechanical circulatory support for destination therapy in this population is not well defined. A review of the literature was undertaken to better characterize our experience to date with mechanical circulatory support in older heart failure populations. Mechanical circulatory support is being employed increasingly for destination therapy indications in older patients. The newer continuous flow devices appear to have disproportionate advantage in elderly patients, which has translated into marked improvement in 1- and 2-year survival. The rational implementation of MCS devices in elderly heart failure patients needs to focus on (1) continuous flow devices that appear to have particular benefit in this population, (2) extensive pre-MCS assessment including variables relating to frailty, and (3) intervening before these patients develop cardiogenic shock. More data are needed on the cost-benefit analysis of routine use of CF devices as destination therapy in elderly patients with heart failure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.