ReviewWorld journal of transplantation2016
Hemodynamic monitoring in heart failure and pulmonary hypertension: From analog tracings to the digital age.
Review in World journal of transplantation, 2016. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pulmonary hypertension secondary to valvular heart disease: a state-of-the-art review.Heart failure reviews · 2024Review
- Integrated use of cardiac MRI and the CardioMEMS™ HF system in PAH: the utility of coincident pressure and volume in RV failure-the NHLBI-VITA trial.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2019Article
- CardioMEMS: where we are and where can we go?Annals of translational medicine · 2019Review
- Correlation of cardiomyocyte apoptosis with duration of hypertension, severity of hypertension and caspase-3 expression in hypertensive rats.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2019Article
- Baseline diastolic pressure gradient and pressure reduction in chronic heart failure patients implanted with the CardioMEMS™ HF sensor.ESC heart failure · 2018Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hemodynamic monitoring has long formed the cornerstone of heart failure (HF) and pulmonary hypertension diagnosis and management. We review the long history of invasive hemodynamic monitors initially using pulmonary artery (PA) pressure catheters in the hospital setting, to evaluating the utility of a number of implantable devices that can allow for ambulatory determination of intracardiac pressures. Although the use of indwelling PA catheters has fallen out of favor in a number of settings, implantable devices have afforded clinicians an opportunity for objective determination of a patient's volume status and pulmonary pressures. Some devices, such as the CardioMEMS and thoracic impedance monitors present as part of implantable cardiac defibrillators, are supported by a body of evidence which show the potential to reduce HF related morbidity and have received regulatory approval, whereas other devices have failed to show benefit and, in some cases, harm. Clearly these devices can convey a considerable amount of information and clinicians should start to familiarize themselves with their use and expect further development and refinement in the future.
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.