ArticleThe American journal of cardiology2017
Global Outcome in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices.
Article in The American journal of cardiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional recovery and quality-of-life improvement 12 months after LVAD implantation: A single-center cohort.JHLT open · 2026Article
- Novel Acoustic Biomarker of Quality of Life in Left Ventricular Assist Device Recipients.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Article
- Review
- A Rising Hope of an Artificial Heart: Left Ventricular Assisted Device - Outcome, Convenience, and Quality of Life.Cureus · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) improve survival and quality of life (QOL) for most, but not all, patients with advanced heart failure. We described a broader definition of poor outcomes after LVAD, using a novel composite of death, QOL, and other major adverse events. We evaluated the frequency of poor global outcome at 1 year after LVAD among 164 patients (86% Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support profile 1 to 2; shock or declining despite inotropes) at a high-volume center. Poor global outcome (comprising death, poor QOL [Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire <45], recurrent heart failure [≥2 heart failure readmissions], or severe stroke) occurred in 58 patients (35%): 37 died, 17 had poor QOL, 3 had recurrent heart failure, and 1 had a severe stroke. Patients with poor global outcomes were more likely designated for destination therapy (46% vs 24%, p = 0.01), spent more days hospitalized per month alive (median [interquartile range] 18.6 [5.0 to 31.0] vs 3.7 [1.8 to 8.3], p <0.001), and had higher intracranial (12% vs 2%, p = 0.031) and gastrointestinal (44% vs 28%, p = 0.056) hemorrhage rates over the year after implant. Although LVADs often improve survival and QOL, ∼1/3 of high-acuity patients experienced a poor global outcome over the year after LVAD. In conclusion, composite outcomes may better capture events that matter to patients with LVADs and thus support informed decisions about pursuing LVAD therapy.
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.