ReviewMethodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal
Physiological impact of continuous flow on end-organ function: clinical implications in the current era of left ventricular assist devices.
Review in Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Stroke and Intracranial Hemorrhage in HeartMate II and HeartWare Left Ventricular Assist Devices: A Systematic Review.Neurocritical care · 2017Pooled it
- Pulsatility as a Potential Regulator of Cardiovascular Biology: Molecular, Cellular, and Hemodynamic Remodeling During Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Support and Following Heart Transplantation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Design of a Soft Robotic Artificial Cardiac Wall.Artificial organs · 2025Article
- Iron Deficiency in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Devices.Cardiac failure review · 2024Review
- Early stroke after left ventricular assist device implantation: role of right heart failure.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- The ongoing quest for the first total artificial heart as destination therapy.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2022Review
- Neurocritical Care of Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The clinical era of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices has debunked many myths about the dire need of a pulse for human existence. While this therapy has been documented to provide a clear survival benefit in end-stage heart failure patients, we are now faced with certain morbidity challenges that as of yet have no easy mechanistic physiological explanation. The effect of physiological changes on end-organ function in patients supported by continuous-flow ventricular assist devices may offer insight into some of these morbidities. We therefore present a review of current evidence documenting the impact of continuous flow on end-organ function.
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.