Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33811570›Full record

SynthesisHeart failure reviews2022

Minimally invasive versus conventional continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation for heart failure: a meta-analysis.

Bufan Zhang, Shaohua Guo, Zean Fu, Zhigang Liu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Heart failure reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bufan ZhangDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, TEDA International Cardiovascular Hospital, Cardiovascular Clinical College of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, People's Republic of China.
Shaohua GuoTianjin Key Laboratory of Ionic-Molecular Function of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Cardiology, Tianjin Institute of Cardiology, Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, People's Republic of China.
Zean FuDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, TEDA International Cardiovascular Hospital, Cardiovascular Clinical College of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, People's Republic of China.
Zhigang LiuDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, TEDA International Cardiovascular Hospital, Cardiovascular Clinical College of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, People's Republic of China. liuzg@tedaich.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4584-2506
TEDA International Cardiovascular Hospital · CNSecond Hospital of Tianjin Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many studies have reported various minimally invasive techniques for continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation. There is no consensus on whether minimally invasive techniques can bring more benefits for patients compared with the conventional technique, due to the limited number of patients and diverse results in current studies. Our meta-analysis mainly discussed the comparison of minimally invasive and conventional techniques. We searched controlled trials from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases until Dec 11, 2020. Perioperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed among 10 included studies. The protocol has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020221532). There were no statistical differences in the 30-day mortality (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.29 to 1.14), 6-month mortality (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.41 to 1.05), neurological dysfunction (OR 1.10; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.76), major infection (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.36 to 1.28), and pump thrombus (OR 1.49; 95% CI 0.63 to 3.52) among the cohorts. Minimally invasive techniques were associated with lower incidences of major bleeding (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.68), severe right heart failure (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.81), and less blood-product utilization (SMD -0.44). Sensitivity analysis suggested that minimally invasive techniques were associated with a lower incidence of respiratory failure (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.96) and shorter mechanical ventilation time (SMD -0.53). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients, implanted with a centrifugal pump by minimally invasive techniques, were associated with a shorter length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (SMD -0.27) and hospital stay (SMD -0.42), and less blood-product utilization (SMD -0.26). In conclusion, minimally invasive techniques can reduce the risks of major bleeding, severe right heart failure, and blood-product utilization, as well as have positive impacts on reducing mechanical ventilation time and the risk of respiratory failure. Minimally invasive centrifugal pump implantation can reduce the length of ICU and hospital stay.

Indexed as

Heart-Assist DevicesHeart FailureRespiratory InsufficiencyHumansLength of StayRetrospective StudiesContinuous-flow left ventricular assist deviceHeart failureMinimally invasive techniquesThe conventional technique

Identifiers

PMID33811570
OpenAlexW3145431972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.