SynthesisInternational journal of cardiology2017
Durable mechanical circulatory support in teenagers and adults with congenital heart disease: A systematic review.
Synthesis in International journal of cardiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Durable ventricular assist device in adult patients with single ventricle: a systematic literature review.Heart failure reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Ventricular assist devices in functionally univentricular hearts.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2025Review
- Heart Failure in Complex Congenital Heart Disease of the Adult.Current cardiology reports · 2022Review
- Durable Mechanical Circulatory Support in Adult Congenital Heart Disease: Reviewing Clinical Considerations and Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Long-Term Risk of Heart Failure-Related Death and Heart Transplant After Congenital Heart Surgery in Childhood (from the Pediatric Cardiac Care Consortium).The American journal of cardiology · 2022Article
- General principles of heart failure management in adult congenital heart disease.Heart failure reviews · 2020Review
- Transplant and mechanical circulatory support in patients with adult congenital heart disease.Heart failure reviews · 2020Review
- 2019 EACTS Expert Consensus on long-term mechanical circulatory support.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2019Article
- Current spectrum, challenges and new developments in the surgical care of adults with congenital heart disease.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2018Review
- Heart Transplantation and Mechanical Circulatory Support in Adults with Congenital Heart Disease.Current cardiology reports · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHeart failure is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality for adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD). Many patients are ineligible for transplantation, and those who are eligible often face long wait times with high wait-list morbidity. Durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may be an option for many patients. This systematic review evaluates the published literature on the use of durable MCS in teenagers and adults with congenital heart disease.
methodsA comprehensive search of MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed electronically in July 2015 and updated in March 2016, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines.
resultsIndividual case reports and several case series identified 66 patients with ACHD treated with durable MCS. More than half were INTERMACS 1 or 2 at the time of implantation. Patients with Fontan repairs were more frequently classified as INTERMACS 1 or 2 (89% compared to 59% or less among other groups). Cases published after 2010 showed a trend toward less severe INTERMACS status, and patients were less likely to have received transplants by the time of reporting (31% compared to 61% prior). Durable MCS was implanted as bridge-to-transplant in 77%. Patients with Fontan repair accounted for 14% of cases.
conclusionReports of durable MCS utilization in patients with ACHD are becoming more frequent and devices are being implanted in more stable patients. Reports are mostly case reports or small case series so reporting bias is likely and prospective protocoled reporting is needed.
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.