ArticleIEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering2019
Leveraging Device-Arterial Coupling to Determine Cardiac and Vascular State.
Article in IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering, 2019. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic load modulation predicts right heart tolerance of left ventricular cardiovascular assist in a porcine model of cardiogenic shock.Science translational medicine · 2024Article
- Hysteretic device characteristics indicate cardiac contractile state for guiding mechanical circulatory support device use.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2021Article
- A Scalable Approach to Determine Intracardiac Pressure From Mechanical Circulatory Support Device Signals.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2021Article
- Dynamic Modulation of Device-Arterial Coupling to Determine Cardiac Output and Vascular Resistance.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveLimitations in available diagnostic metrics restrict the efficacy of managing therapies for cardiogenic shock. In current clinical practice, cardiovascular state is inferred through measurement of pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and reliance on linear approximations between pressure and flow to estimate peripheral vascular resistance. Mechanical circulatory support devices residing within the left ventricle and aorta provide an opportunity for both determining cardiac and vascular state and offering therapeutic benefit. We leverage the controllable mode of operation and transvalvular position of an indwelling percutaneous ventricular assist device to assess vascular and, in turn, cardiac state through the effects of device-arterial coupling across different levels of device support.
methodsVascular state is determined by measuring changes in the pressure waveforms induced through intentional variation in the device generated blood flow. We evaluate this impact by applying a lumped parameter model to quantify state-specific vascular resistance and compliance and calculate beat-to-beat stroke volume and cardiac output in both animal models and retrospective patient data without external calibration.
resultsVascular state was accurately predicted in patients and animals in both baseline and experimental conditions. In the animal, stroke volume was predicted within a total root mean square error of 3.71 mL (n = 482).
conclusionWe demonstrate that device-arterial coupling is a powerful tool for evaluating patient and state specific parameters of cardiovascular function. SIGNIFICANCE: These insights may yield improved clinical care and support the development of next generation mechanical circulatory support devices that determine and operate in tandem with the supported organ.
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.