ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2021
Pre-implant left ventricular dimension is not associated with worse outcomes after left ventricular assist device implantation.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Special Considerations for Advanced Heart Failure Surgeries: Durable Left Ventricular Devices and Heart Transplantation.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLeft ventricular dimension has the potential to impact clinical outcomes following implantation of left ventricular assist devices (LVAD). We investigated the effect of pre-implant left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) on outcomes following LVAD implantation.
methodsPatients implanted with a continuous-flow LVAD between 2004 and 2018 at a single institution were included. The primary outcome was death while on LVAD support. Secondary outcomes included adverse event rates such as renal failure requiring dialysis, device thrombosis, and right ventricular failure. The LVEDD measurements were dichotomized using restricted cubic splines and threshold regression. Survival was determined using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine risk-adjusted mortality based on LVEDD.
resultsA total of 344 patients underwent implantation of a continuous flow LVAD during the study period. The optimal cut point for LVEDD was 65 mm, with 126 (36.6%) subjects in the <65 mm group and 165 (48.0%) in the >65 mm group. The LVEDD <65 mm group was older, had more females, higher incidence of diabetes, more pre-implant mechanical ventilation, and more admissions for acute myocardial infarctions (all, P<0.05). Importantly, post-implant adverse events were similar between the groups (all, P>0.05). Risk-adjusted survival at 1-year (OR 1.3, 95% CI: 0.6-2.5, P=0.53) was also comparable between the groups. Furthermore, incremental increases in LVEDD when modeled as a continuous variable did not impact overall mortality (OR 0.98, 95% CI: 0.9-1.0, P=0.09).
conclusionsPreoperative LVEDD was not associated with rates of major morbidities or mortality following LVAD implantation.
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.