ArticleScientific reports2020
Differences in the prognoses of patients referred to an advanced heart failure center from hospitals with different bed volumes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Few reports have discussed appropriate strategies for patient referrals to advanced heart failure (HF) centers with available left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). We examined the association between the characteristics and prognoses of referred patients with advanced HF and the bed volume of the referring hospitals. This retrospective analysis evaluated 186 patients with advanced HF referred to our center for consultation about the indication of LVAD between January 1, 2015, and August 31, 2018. We divided the patients into two groups according to the bed volume of their referring hospital (high bed volume hospitals (HBHs): ≥ 500 beds in the hospital; low bed volume hospitals (LBHs): < 500 beds). We compared the primary outcome measure, a composite of LVAD implantation and all-cause death, between the patients referred from HBHs and patients referred from LBHs. The 186 patients with advanced HF referred to our hospital, who were referred from 130 hospitals (87 from LBHs and 99 from HBHs), had a mean age of 43.0 ± 12.6 years and a median left ventricular ejection fraction of 22% [15-33%]. The median follow-up duration of the patients was 583 days (119-965 days), and the primary outcome occurred during follow-up in 42 patients (43%) in the HBH group and 20 patients (23%) in the LBH group. Patients referred from HBHs tended to require catecholamine infusion on transfer more often than those referred from LBLs (36.5% (HBH), 20.2% (LBL), P = 0.021). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicates that the occurrence of the primary outcome was significantly higher in the HBH patients than in the LBH patients (log-rank P = 0.0022). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed that catecholamine support on transfer and long disease duration were statistically significant predictors of the primary outcome. Patients from HBHs had a greater risk of the primary outcome. However, the multivariate analysis did not indicate an association between referral from an HBH and the primary outcome. In contrast, catecholamine support on transfer, long duration of disease, and low blood pressure were independent predictors of the primary outcome. Therefore, these should be considered when determining the timing of a referral to an advanced HF center, irrespective of the bed volume of the referring hospital.
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.