Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30026915›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2018

Recent advances in heart transplantation.

Michelle M Kittleson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Michelle M KittlesonSmidt Heart Institute at Cedars-Sinai, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4492-2691

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite advances in medical and electrical therapies for heart failure, morbidity and mortality remain high and patients often progress to end-stage heart failure. Over the last five decades, heart transplantation is considered a standard therapy for select patients with end-stage heart failure. However, while heart transplantation has become a treatment of choice for end-stage heart failure, challenges still exist for improvement in the short- and long-term outcomes. While there is an increase in the number of patients with end-stage heart failure, the number of donor organs remains a major limiting factor. Heart transplantation candidates in the current era are also more complex: older, antigen-sensitized, and on mechanical circulatory support at the time of listing and transplant. Such potential heart transplant recipients have an increased chance of problems, including antibody-mediated rejection and primary graft dysfunction. Recent advances could address the current challenges and include: 1) attempts to expand the pool of donor hearts; 2) changes in heart transplantation allocation policy allowing for more equitable organ distribution; and 3) advances in the management of antibody sensitization. Developments in these areas could result in improved survival and quality of life for heart transplantation recipients.

Indexed as

crossmatchHeart transplantationorgan allocationsensitizationtransplant rejection

Identifiers

PMID30026915
PMCPMC6039932

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.