SynthesisHeart failure reviews2018
Temporary assist device support for the right ventricle: pre-implant and post-implant challenges.
Synthesis in Heart failure reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Right Ventricular Adaptability to Pressure Overloading for Critical Therapeutic Decision-Making Processes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Optimization of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Weaning: Hemodynamic Targets, Predictive Indicators, and Future Algorithm.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Outcomes following isolated right ventricular assist device as durable support for primary right heart failure: An INTERMACS analysis.JHLT open · 2025Article
- The ProtekDuo Cannula: A Comprehensive Review of Efficacy and Clinical Applications in Right Ventricular Failure.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Monitoring of the right ventricular responses to pressure overload: prognostic value and usefulness of echocardiography for clinical decision-making.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2024Review
- Device therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a new era.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Cardiological Challenges Related to Long-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support for Advanced Heart Failure in Patients with Chronic Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Heart-lung interactions in COVID-19: prognostic impact and usefulness of bedside echocardiography for monitoring of the right ventricle involvement.Heart failure reviews · 2022Review
- Percutaneous dual-outflow extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support in secondary right ventricular failure.JTCVS techniques · 2022Article
- Role of Echocardiography in the Management of Patients with Advanced (Stage D) Heart Failure Related to Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Temporary Right-Ventricular Assist Devices: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Article
- Weaning from ventricular assist device support after recovery from left ventricular failure with or without secondary right ventricular failure.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2021Review
- Mechanical circulatory support systems: evolution, the systems and outlook.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2021Review
- Right Ventricular Failure: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and Treatment.Cardiac failure review · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Severe right ventricular (RV) failure is more likely reversible than similar magnitudes of left ventricular (LV) failure and, because reversal of both adaptive remodeling and impaired contractility require most often only short periods of support, the use of temporary RV assist devices (t-RVADs) can be a life-saving therapy option for many patients. Although increased experience with t-RVADs and progresses made in the development of safer devices with lower risk for complications has improved both recovery rate of RV function and patient survival, the mortality of t-RVAD recipients can still be high but it depends mainly on the primary cause of RV failure (RVF), the severity of end-organ dysfunction, and the timing of RVAD implantation, and much less on adverse events and complications related to RVAD implantation, support, or removal. Reduced survival of RVAD recipients should therefore not discourage appropriate application of RVADs because their underuse further reduces the chances for RV recovery and patient survival. The article reviews and discusses the challenges related to the pre-implant and post-implant decision-making processes aiming to get best possible therapeutic results. Special attention is focused on pre-implant RV assessment and prediction of RV improvement during mechanical unloading, patient selection for t-RVAD therapy, assessment of unloading-promoted RV recovery, and prediction of its stability after RVAD removal. Particular consideration is also given to prediction of RVF after LVAD implantation which is usually hampered by the complex interactions between the different risk factors related indirectly or directly to the RV potential for reverse remodeling and functional recovery.
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.